15-02-2011, 08:18 PM
11
Re: Prince Harry - National Disgrace?
Originally Posted by White Raven
->
There's a massive difference between falling out of a Nightclub and letting your hair down. I can see your not to be swayed from your own opinion so I'll say nomore.
There, is that better?
15-02-2011, 10:46 PM
13
Re: Prince Harry - National Disgrace?
I do remember as a young squaddy in 1961 none of us ever got drunk let alone would think of entering a pub even to buy an orange squash.Are officers made sure we stuck to the temperance path by taking to church on Sunday.
The above aint true by the way in fact I was drunk for most week ends along with a great Scottish mate who was posted to Aden and was killed.
So who was the National disgrace? me the drunk who survived or the drunk who died for his country?
15-02-2011, 11:01 PM
14
Re: Prince Harry - National Disgrace?
Originally Posted by plantman
->
sorry white raven, you are absolutely correct of course.There, is that better?
22-02-2011, 12:51 PM
16
Re: Prince Harry - National Disgrace?
For once I agree with you Plantman, but why stop at just Harry??? - How about we get rid of the whole bunch of 'em, (that will save vast amounts of 'OUR' money on the so-called 'Civil List') do what they're currently doing across a number of countries in the Middle East, hold our very own revolution and have an 'elected' head of state who can be voted out of office when the majority of the population determine that.
22-02-2011, 01:15 PM
17
Re: Prince Harry - National Disgrace?
[QUOTE=Uncle Joe;91151]For once I agree with you Plantman, but why stop at just Harry??? - How about we get rid of the whole bunch of 'em, (that will save vast amounts of 'OUR' money on the so-called 'Civil List') do what they're currently doing across a number of countries in the Middle East, hold our very own revolution and have an 'elected' head of state who can be voted out of office when the majority of the population determine that.[/QUOTE]Change the term head of state for Prime Minister Uncle Joe and isn't that what we've already got? The Royals are not our government are they
- I thought they help our tourist industry survive and are of some use to us as diplomats.
22-02-2011, 01:30 PM
18
Re: Prince Harry - National Disgrace?
Aerolor the Prime Minister is NOT our 'Head of State, Mrs Windsor is. Whilst Oliver Cromwell did a lot to take away the so-called rights and privileges of the Monarchy, nonetheless some important ones still survive. We also pay vast sums into the Civil List, which the Monarchy are currently fighting to be 'outside' the 'Freedom of Information Act' so that we may not know how much or where, how and in what circumstances 'OUR' money is being spent on them. If we are to have a 'Head of State' then I demand that we have a right to say who that person may be, and for how long they 'SERVE' as head of State. If, during their term of office they happen to do something (or fail to do something) which is in the National Interest, then I further demand that the 'Head of State' be accountable to Parliament and we, the British people have a RIGHT to de-select whosoever is such 'Head of State' at periodic intervals - THAT is Democracy, not the half-hearted abject apology of democracy we currently have.22-02-2011, 01:48 PM
19
Re: Prince Harry - National Disgrace?
I never said the Prime Minister was head of state Uncle Joe - I meant we already have a democratically elected government in this country - we also have the Royal family, who do not govern this country.Are you suggesting we change our system completely and have an elected President. If so, that President would still belong to a political party who wished to be in government. The Queen is supposed to belong to no political party.
22-02-2011, 04:43 PM
20
Re: Prince Harry - National Disgrace?
The Queen is supposed to belong to no political party.Aerolor my friend, your naievety is charming. Mr & Mrs Windsor have a vested interest in preserving the status quo by supporting a particular political party that is vowed in its very title to preserve that status quo. Advocate a radical policy which threatens the existence of their royal privileges and you will see which side of the fence they come down on.
Those of us who are 'hard left' want an elected 'Head of State', one who can be voted in or out of office as the PEOPLE determine, not foisted on us because Mrs Windsor's predessessors were bigger robber barons than those immediately surrounding them.
|
|
