Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
US Citizen

We Were British Once

Recommended Posts

If your reading this, then you will not be surprised to know that unelected busybodies in Brussel now control the amount of immigrants we are expected to take as a country. The same people who decide how much fish we can catch in our own territorial waters. Thats would also be the same people who pass 85% of our laws.

We have been sold out to Europe. We are not British anymore than we are English or Scottish or Welsh. Thats just happens to be a territory, we are Europeans.

Who is running this country anyway ? Gordon Brown. The way I heard it is he is nearly blind with his one remaining eye and this is making him so depressed he is taking some pretty strong anti-depressents. No direspect to the man on a personal level, but they wouldnt let you drive or operate machinary taking these drugs, I think it is safe to say you shouldnt be running a country with 60 million people in it either.

Or maybe it Peter Mandlesson running the country ? So here we have a homosexual, who got elected to a safe labour seat, started fiddling in the non sexual but financial way and got himself slung out of one of the safest labour seats about. Rehired shortly after to euro, where he was so drunk of partying as a trade commisioner when he realised it was 2008 and not 2006 as he though he said, "whaty do you mean my matye Tony's not Prime Minister". When he promptly came back to Britiain, and was made Business Secreatary, A Baron, and 1st Secretary of state and not to mention Lord President of the Privvy Council too. All completely unelected and unaccountable. This cant be right.

Or finally we should move out of Politics and look at the Lady who graces our fair currency, stamps and lives in all the big houses. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. I actually think she is a very good person, but what is she doing to stop Britain sliding deeper and deeper into Europe ?

Should I be saying, what can she do ? If the answer is yes, she is doing something, then what she is doing to stop it.

If the answer is no she isnt doing anything but she can, then questions need to be asked why she isnt doing anything to to stop it.

But if the answer is She cant do anything, then a very serious question must be asked and that is this :

Is it time to hand power back to the people of this land and form a British Republic.


  • A duly elected President
  • A written constitution protecting the rights of the Citizen
  • Both houses of Parliment to have Elections
  • If we do decide to keep the Royal Family then we need a Executive President as well
  • A Citizens Card, which entitles the bearer to an income from the state, but also it must be earned.

If the old system isnt working and it isnt, then this is a golden opportunity to start again.

Edited by Rt. Hon. Lord Mandelson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or maybe it Peter Mandlesson running the country ? So here we have a homosexual, who got elected to a safe labour seat, started fiddling in the non sexual but financial way and got himself slung out of one of the safest labour seats about.

He never lost his seat; he resigned it to take up his post in Brussles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its high time for a civil war - we're just waiting for someone to get off their bum and create an English National Army.

Action, if any is to be taken, should be to rid our society of the sociopaths that have destroyed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah!

After X-Factor though.

Strictly has just started too, so that's me out of action for months.

Shame, I'm quite accurate with a .38.

Who is the target again?

Poor timing with the call to arms Mandy, not like you at all :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or maybe it Peter Mandlesson running the country ? So here we have a homosexual, who got elected to a safe labour seat, started fiddling in the non sexual but financial way

Out of interest - do you think a homosexual is less capable politically than anybody else, and more inclined to fiddle in a 'sexual way'?

Edited by daniel stallion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Queen can only do something if her subjects petition her to dissolve parliament.

The Queen can only deal with 'her subjects' through her ministers.

The last monarch who thought he could go over the head of the cabinet was Edward VIII. He thought it was a bright idea to make a national broadcast to 'his' people, go abroad for a short while, then return to face the decision of the 'nation' regarding his marriage to Mrs Simpson. Stanley Baldwin, the Tory P.M., reminded Edward of his powerless and lowly position and ordered Lord Reith to take the BBC off-air if the King tried to go ahead without his ministers' permission. Edward was not allowed to make the broadcast and saw that, despite what he thought were 'his' peoples' views, what really mattered was who was in charge in Downing Street. He lost. He went, for good. Constitutional monarchs do what they're told by democratically elected politicians. That's how it is. That's how it'll stay.

So, forget any airy-fairy petition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The last monarch who thought he could go over the head of the cabinet was Edward VIII. He thought it was a bright idea to make a national broadcast to 'his' people, go abroad for a short while, then return to face the decision of the 'nation' regarding his marriage to Mrs Simpson. Stanley Baldwin, the Tory P.M., reminded Edward of his powerless and lowly position and ordered Lord Reith to take the BBC off-air if the King tried to go ahead without his ministers' permission. Edward was not allowed to make the broadcast and saw that, despite what he thought were 'his' peoples' views, what really mattered was who was in charge in Downing Street. He lost. He went, for good. Constitutional monarchs do what they're told by democratically elected politicians. That's how it is. That's how it'll stay.

Do you think that the Cabinet could pull the same trick now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If your reading this, then you will not be surprised to know that unelected busybodies in Brussel now control the amount of immigrants we are expected to take as a country. The same people who decide how much fish we can catch in our own territorial waters. Thats would also be the same people who pass 85% of our laws.

....

I am very surprised by this. So surprised I had to check on Google to see if UK law had changed since I got up this morning.

It hasn't - you're a liar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think that the Cabinet could pull the same trick now?

Yes. And, it's no trick - it's the constitution. The monarchy is merely decorative. And, disposable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes. And, it's no trick - it's the constitution. The monarchy is merely decorative. And, disposable.

They'd have a hard job stopping the monarch from addressing the people directly though. It would create a constitutional crisis which wouldn't have such a neat outcome as you suggest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the republic bit - In the long term I favour the replacement of the monarchy by an elected constitutional presidency. I reckon the Queen, though, has earned her place as head of state so the abolition of the monarchy is on the back burner while she's around. But the monarchy is an anachronism in country that claims to be modern and democratic, a relic of an agreement in 1215 that allowed the monarchy to keep its wealth and privilege in return for giving up absolute power. But why run the farm yourself if you can afford to pay a farm manager?

I disagree about the EU though. I have always been a loyal supporter of the EU in principle and would favour us adopting the Euro as a currency. We are legally citizens of the EU as well as the UK now, with a right to travel, live and work anywhere in the EU. Leaving the EU would mean we'd lose those rights. Leaving the EU would also tear the UK apart as the Scots and Welsh tend to be much more European-minded than the English.

Edited by blankster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They'd have a hard job stopping the monarch from addressing the people directly though. It would create a constitutional crisis which wouldn't have such a neat outcome as you suggest.

A royal coup? Get real!

When you've got a job paying millions a year for doing next to nothing with no responsibilities and loads of palaces, would you give that up? For what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Queen's too preoccupied with her own financial problems to concern herself with the little people's.

Informed sources suggest visitor numbers were down at Buck House this summer and there's the very real danger that she might have to lay off a corgi or two.

As others in this thread have intimated, there's so many great programmes on the box these days that it'll be tricky finding the time for a spot of protesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree about the EU though. I have always been a loyal supporter of the EU in principle and would favour us adopting the Euro as a currency. We are legally citizens of the EU as well as the UK now, with a right to travel, live and work anywhere in the EU. Leaving the EU would mean we'd lose those rights. Leaving the EU would also tear the UK apart as the Scots and Welsh tend to be much more European-minded than the English.

We don't have to be part of a political union to enjoy the parts of the EU that we wanted to keep.

So you want the Euro? No problem, there's no reason why we couldn't adopt it without political union. Several smaller countries have done just that; Monaco and San Marino have official agreements and a couple of others like Kosovo and Andorra have adopted in unofficially.

Free trade, heard of EFTA? which includes the free movement of people throughout the EU but has restricted access to some of the newest members:

With the enlargements of the EEA in 2004 and 2007, the EEA EFTA States have the possibility to foresee transitional arrangements which can restrict the free movement of workers. These transitional arrangements cannot extend beyond an absolute maximum of seven years after accession to the EU. Iceland decided not to apply transitional arrangements to the workers from the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia since 1 May 2006, while Norway and Liechtenstein are still applying transitional measures. But all three EEA EFTA States apply transitional measures to workers from Bulgaria and Romania.

http://www.efta.int/content/eea/policy-are...ersons/-persons

We could be pickier over the parts of the EU that we wanted to keep, but because its such a mess of complex laws agreements and regulations in general I think we've been bamboozled into either taking it all or nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with point 4. The problem with our constitutional monarchy is not the Queen, whose role as de jure head of state is strictly defined by the Bill of Rights, etc, but with the role of the de facto head of state, the PM, who can essentially do what he wants (and of course isn't 'elected' in any meaningful sense). Politicians of course don't like us to be too aware of this so they, especially the 'progressives' and lefty types, constantly throw up smokescreens about the monarchy as a distraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... the de facto head of state, the PM, who can essentially do what he wants (and of course isn't 'elected' in any meaningful sense).

It would be really daft to have an elected PM who may then not have a majority in the Commons. Anything and everything (s)he did could be over-ruled by the elected house. That would be total chaos.

By the way, the PM cannot 'essentially do what he wants' - PM's can, and do, lose support and are dumped. Just ask Mrs Thatcher! The Conservative hierarchy - many of them her hand-picked team - saw that her behaviour was resulting in the party haemorrhaging support and the way to stop it was to kick her out. It worked and the party went on to win the General Election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the monarch is merely a figure head, but surely after seeing her subjects ridiculed by a criminally negligent government some words of empathy would have gone down well?

The complete disdain shown for her citizens will only speed up the republican calls. Fact is, why the F should the monarch care? they stand to gain regardless

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   296 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.