Watching the Obama's glide through the UK can be quite seductive: young gifted and black as the song said. As they strolled regally through Buckingham Palace with the Queen and her consort one can't help but reflect on the mind set which still sees black people as inferior: it would be easy to mistake Barack and Michelle as Royalty and Elizabeth and Philip as dutiful retainers, colour notwithstanding of course. Being able to eavesdrop on their conversation would no doubt highlight the gap in intelligence between them as well; you decide who wins that one.
I wonder though if Mr. And Mrs. Obama really know who they are dealing with, recent events should give them a clue. King Hamad al- Kahlifa of Bahrain is a tyrant and a despot who was invited to the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton, when he and they were rumbled he was quickly shown the door and of course no one asked why they had invited such an appalling character unfortunately for the 'Firm' he refuses to go away.
The Queens horse Carlton House is favourite to win the Derby. The first Royal owned winner for over a hundred years if it pulls it off, how proud she must be. The horse is a bit of a swindle in that it was not bred by the Royal stables but given to her majesty as a present by, wait for it, Sheikh Mohammed; ruler and defence minister of Dubai as well as being Vice President of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Think now of Saudi Arabia where women are beheaded for adultery (men are OK) and thieves have hands and feet amputated. The UAE have sent troops and equipment to Saudi Arabia to protect the medieval Royal criminals who have polluted the place for too long against the people who are demanding justice and democracy.
Some people insist that the Royal Family should be looked up to, an example to us all if you will, will her majesty send the horse back considering that just about everyone is now frowning on the Arab dictators who send her presents like potential Derby winners, should we look up to them? Well? As Philip would no doubt say to her wonderfulness "OK old girl these Arabs are a rum lot but at least they are not Catholics, and there's no denying they are filthy rich and generous to a fault when it comes to dealing with their fellow Royals like us"
Being able to eavesdrop on their conversation would no doubt highlight the gap in intelligence between them as well.
Who is the bigot here?????
Terry dear boy, most of what you speak of is as a direct result of British foreign policy and still is.
Overseen and continued by successive Labour gov's many of whom now float about in their ermine and cash in their daily attendence allowance in the lords all bowing and scraping. Ask that bastion of social mobility Baroness Adams finished representing the working class plebs and now slumbers on the red benches amongst all the other x 'socialists' never to be heard of again.
I feel you are more agrieved than ashamed that you have not been 'called' to the upper house and required to buy a fur coat, coronet and tights. Asda do them on a roll back special for x socialists who are 'keeping it real'
The Act of Settlement which the Queen is happy to go along with is institutionally sectarian and supports anti female bigotry. Is that what you are getting at?
I don't see any other evidence of bigotry perhaps you could explain and have a go at the Act of Settlement while you are at it.
Terry Dear boy.
The Queen is the head of the CoE and therefore head of a church.
and of course there are dozens of anglican bishops hiding among the 700 lordies making law on our behalf. The only way of getting shot of the whole lot is Scottish Independence unless of course you are advocating abolition of the monarchy which of course Labour have never advocated or will.
No the pseudo socialists like the chance to lounge around with the 'lifers,'landed gentry, and tax dodgers, it's the smell of old money you know, and being in the club, quite alluring.
And they gave that murderous Romanian, Ceascu, a knighthood.
What do you think the reason for that was?
By Jim Lewis on THE ROYAL WEDDING GUEST LIST – WHY I’M A CITIZEN N... on 26/05/11
I have answered your comments on Cuba and you can look them up. Having a different voting system from us does not mean that ours is superior.
“Of course, that might explain how someone with so little regard for the electorate and the political process manages to keep getting himself re-elected”
And then later on you accuse me of making a fool of myself, dear dear Jim. Perhaps I should take up what you say and at the next election if I stand I should tell the voters where to stick their votes and call them all a shower of B******s then I would win by a landslide. You are a fool aren't you Jim you really are.
By Anonymous on DON’T PANIC, WHEN CHARLES IS KING IT WILL ALL BE F... at 10:57
The awarding of such baubles is a thoroughly bad thing and always has been. Not only did they give a bauble to Ceacescue but one went to Mussolini as well, both were taken back though.
However; similar baubles were awarded to Presidents Bush and Reagan, Henry Kissinger, J. Edgar Hoover and General Douglas MacArthur and they were allowed to keep theirs that is simply not fair.
I assume you are talking about some kind of independence with no input from the SNP who support the monarchy and who also have never called for its abolition and never will, many of them would like to see the back of the British Queen and replace her with a Stuart monarch, they are as royalist as any English nationalist.
There is as I said only one way of overthrowing the privilege of the Lords and the Monarchy and that is the Labour Party.
"There is as I said only one way of overthrowing the privilege of the Lords and the Monarchy and that is the Labour Party"
What manifesto is that in then? go on, go back as far as you like even to keir hardie.
your delusional, ask Baroness Adams and Baron Foukes oh and Prescott. Nowt like working folks makin it up the buckle. Labour is riddled with them.
Lord Kelly of Paisley in the Mire, has a ring to it, don't you think?
" Having a different voting system from us does not mean that ours is superior. "
No, ours isn't a superior voting system to that of Cuba, since Cuba doesn't have a voting system. It has a system of mandatory rubber stamping. Voting implies choice. Since no choice is available, it can't really be called an election.
Labour is the only party who will overthrow the privileged classes?
So Prescott, Mandelson and the Kinnocks, are working to accomplish this? A kind of Fifth Column, beavering away to destroy the Lords from the inside?
Wouldn't be in John's shoes when Lady Prescott finds out!
I must admit when I first saw this site posted I thought you were a comedian. No right thinking person could be this stupid and tie his own shoelaces. Thank God for velcro, eh mr terry?
By Brenda on DON’T PANIC, WHEN CHARLES IS KING IT WILL ALL BE F... on 29/05/11
I don’t mind printing stuff like this Brenda I really don’t, if I were to tell others what people like you were like they would think I had made you up.
By Anonymous on DON’T PANIC, WHEN CHARLES IS KING IT WILL ALL BE F... on 28/05/11
I’m never sure which of the anonymous posters I’m addressing and as far as you are concerned I’m not sure it’s worth trying to explain but I will say this and hopefully you will ponder it.
I have been a member of the Labour Party for approx. 40 years and I have never met a single member who supports the House of Lords. We might not be the only Party who wants to abolish the Lords but we are the only party with the remotest chance of ever doing so. Now let me ask you what I have been asking others how would you go about abolition of the Lords?
By Jim Lewis on DON’T PANIC, WHEN CHARLES IS KING IT WILL ALL BE F... on 28/05/11
Jim are you quite well, are you aware you are constantly repeating yourself.
By Anonymous on DON’T PANIC, WHEN CHARLES IS KING IT WILL ALL BE F... on 27/05/11
Since we have done this many times already let me ask you 2 quite simple questions.
A) Are you in favour of abolition of the House of Lords
B) If you answer yes to the above question, how do you propose to go about it?
Terry love, I can understand your confusion identifying which anonymous poster is which, but if you will insist on barring named posters who slightly disagree with you, 'Anon' is the best you're going to get
I've told you before, after six barrings,under different names, I can't be a***d to come up with yet another plume de nom.
By Anonymous on DON’T PANIC, WHEN CHARLES IS KING IT WILL ALL BE F... at 12:17
You are a liar. If you show me an instance of me banning a ‘named’ poster I will apologise to you. I have certainly refused to print stuff before and probably will again but never from someone whom I could identify.
The nature of the beast who prints stuff which gets banned is that they are too cowardly/ embarrassed to back up what they say.
Part list of those Kelly has banned...Clairwil, Maggies Handbag, the guy who almost lost his job because you couldn't handle his comments, Ariel,Sprite and your humble correspondent.
Let's be hearing 'Sorry,', you lying, equivocating, apologist for all that makes Labour unelectable.
Wont hold my breath, but teasing you is such fun...
By Byeck on DON’T PANIC, WHEN CHARLES IS KING IT WILL ALL BE FINE AT 11..47
I have never banned anyone who gave a proper identity. So you are Byeck, so what is that an ID ? if you want to say something which attacks someone else in a way which might be actionable or throw around insults which are crude or lurid then Byeck does not cut it and I don’t know the identity of any of the people you have named. You haven't changed you are still a liar and a coward.
Post a Comment