Jump to content



Recommended Posts

I'll see your tribute and raise you a :

"probably better to have had the royalty, over the last 5 or 700 years, than an alternative form of leadership which could have been worse, if it was religious or other, in it's nature"

For some unfathomable reason, the "people" as a mass, seem to think that following and swearing allegiance to, an individual (or group of) who is the most popular or is the biggest bully, is the way to go.

This is of course, the product of evolution, and is present in almost all mammalian social groupings from Rabbits to Chimps.

These days we are slowly moving towards recognition of the power of intelligence and logic and merit.

I'm not lauding Charles III,  I think he is one of the many at the top, who is in a position to influence the masses, and  may recognise the power of intelligence and logic and merit.

If he can contribute to the betterment of mankind, good on him.


below an example, of some, of the aforementioned biggest bullies...




Link to comment
Share on other sites

In no way whatsoever I wish to say that I am over 70 years old but nonetheless one of the fundamental events in early childhood has been the coronation of Qeen Elizabeth which has taken place on a celluloid (sp?) movie on a machine that had to be powered by hand turning a crank . Just for you to know.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Coss said:

If he can contribute to the betterment of mankind, good on him.

What such as fueling our Aston Martin on Leftover Wine

Does he not know his subjects and the fact that once the cork is out of the bottle it is fully emptied, there is no such thing as “Leftover Wine” in the majority of households.As for the costs, £100 Million to the UK taxpayer, could the tight arsed bastard not pay for it himself.

He is away with the bloody fairies,  come on, you have to question the mental capacity of someone who dumps Diana Spencer for Camilla Parker Bowles 

The sooner the Royal Family is abolished and a Republic is formed with an ELECTED President the better. As for me, I didn’t watch 1 second of coverage let alone pledge allegiance, I was with the Celtic fans all the way and they can shove it up their arse.

Pledging allegiance, sounds very much like North Korea where the youth are forced to pledge allegiance to Kim Jong Un or worse still the USA where school children are forced daily to pledge allegiance to a flag


Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Coss said:

Q: who would you prefer, QE II or Trump?

What a stupid question even for you 🤪

  • Liz is Dead
  • Trump is not British

The question should have been “Who would I prefer, Charles or an Elected British Representative” 

I would side with a democratically elected representative, Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No the question was - "who would you prefer, QE II or Trump?"

and to explain it to the chaps with whom need it explaining to....

Liz is was a recent monarch and by most accounts, not a bad one.

An example of "Republic is formed with an ELECTED President" (your words), would be Trump.

My question therefore, highlighted these two and asked you which you would prefer.

Do you want a relatively benign royalty as Britain has now, or do you want a system that can give you shysters of the first degree, such as Trump?


As to Charles, it's too early to gauge whether or not he is a Good'un.

Both Liz and little Donnie have form.

Ergo I'm not interested in Charles until he's played with the levers for a while.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Coss said:

An example of "Republic is formed with an ELECTED President" (your words), would be Trump.

Trump was ELECTED President of the USA  not the UK, never has or never will have a chance of being elected as an MP, PM or President of the UK therefore my comment “Stupid Question” is still valid

If the USA is valid why not then say the president of China or India which are larger then USA, or Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Brazil, Bangladesh, Russia, Mexico etc 

I tell you why, because, like Trump, non of those presidents is  British therefore would never be elected president of the UK

UK shysters are far classier than the likes of the Trumps of this world,. How about a family who’s forefathers gained power by conquest and still cost the taxpayer over £100 Million per annum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parts of what you say are coherent, but my question to you, was not predicated on a set of criteria, you are now applying to the argument.

My question to you, is which would you prefer? Which one? Liz or the Orange man?

Delving into the relative merits and or structural aspects of the political systems, of the USA vs the UK. Also not part of the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...