rosemary19 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 The thread is a pointless speculation,we will always have a monarchy in this Country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balpin Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 That's what we need someone who's not afraid to speak their mind, call a spade a shovel and will bow to no man or let anyone bow to him/her. Geoffrey Boycott might be a little too abrasive, If you call a spade a shovel then you are wrong in every sense of the names Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balpin Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 The thread is a pointless speculation,we will always have a monarchy in this Country. No we wont, look around you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 We can never have equality as long as we have a hereditary monarchy. I hate the tories but I'd rather have President Cameron than Queen Elizabeth (and doubly so King Charles) any day of the week. Loads of people always peddle that line 'well would you like to see Cameron as president?' as if it's going to embarrass people into sticking with the monarchy. Yes, of course I would. He's already representing our country as prime minister anyway, he's already embarrassing people like me, it's not like he's anonymous at downing street, in the house of commons, and having meetings with heads of states all over the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 We can never have equality as long as we have a hereditary monarchy. I hate the tories but I'd rather have President Cameron than Queen Elizabeth (and doubly so King Charles) any day of the week. Loads of people always peddle that line 'well would you like to see Cameron as president?' as if it's going to embarrass people into sticking with the monarchy. Yes, of course I would. He's already representing our country as prime minister anyway, he's already embarrassing people like me, it's not like he's anonymous at downing street, in the house of commons, and having meetings with heads of states all over the world. But you won't get to wave a flag and have a day or two off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balpin Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 The way things are going, we have an option. It is either the country, or the monarchy. Which do we choose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 But you won't get to wave a flag and have a day or two off. There are loads of things we could celebrate the anniversary of that are way more important than the Queen. Like the parlimentary acts that gave us universal suffrage, or the magna carta, y'know, actual historical achievements instead of congratulating some rich woman who doesn't give a crap about you for not dying. I'm not one for waving flags anyway, but I'll take the days off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted June 9, 2012 Author Share Posted June 9, 2012 I can't believe that after the brilliant success of the Jubilee, people are still airing their miserable Republican left wing views. In todays news it stated that 2,500 people complained to the BBC. At first glance i thought it may have been anti-monarchists complaining about the extensive coverage, but it turned out to be people who were annoyed about the poor unprofessional commentary,the likes of Fern Cotton etc. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/the_queens_diamond_jubilee/9314625/BBC-gets-2500-complaints-for-Diamond-Jubilee-coverage-as-former-controller-admits-they-wont-win-any-BAFTAs.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainbow2411 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 If you call a spade a shovel then you are wrong in every sense of the names The phrase it is perfectly correct and simply means that it is not necessary to use 'posh' words in order to prove that you are erudite, which our Geoff so obviously is With someone such as Boycott we would stand much more of a chance of ensuring that the farce of 'Royal Blood' and all the 'by the grace of God' twaddle that we are subjected to are consigned to history forever along with Lizzie's family who are for the most part unpleasant, useless freeloaders (this my goodbye wave) Hi Janie (this is my hi, please don't hate me wave) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybare Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 No, he never said "Rivers of Blood". Here's what he did say, quoting the Sibyl prophesies in the epic poem Aeneid, 6, 86-7, of "wars, terrible wars, / and the Tiber foaming with much blood" when forecasting- accurately- the future problems that he feared: As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding. Like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood". For more, see http://uk.ask.com/wiki/Rivers_of_Blood_speech Irrespective of the wording he was suggesting that immigration would lead to a break down of the country with the good white folk leaving and being replaced, frighteningly, by black folk. Whether it is/was/will be true is a different matter. Imposing this type of individual with these types of views as president could not be a good thing for a country with diverse ethnic mixtures. Also he's dead now anyways "He advocated voluntary re-emigration by "generous grants and assistance" and he claimed that immigrants had asked him whether it was possible." Seems a similar political theory to the one proposed by the BNP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.