UN: Should Britain scrap Royals?

ukiprule · 13-06-2008, 10:51 PM

I think they should take a running jump
UN: Should Britain scrap Royals? - Yahoo! News UK

Roland · 13-06-2008, 11:02 PM

Wile the royal family have proved beyond all shadow of a doubt that they are a wast of oxygen, time and money, what the hell have the UN got to do with it.

The UN is supposed to be a international body that deals with international issues.

The issue of the royal family is Britain's and the British peoples. It's none of the UN's business.

Northumbrian · 13-06-2008, 11:21 PM

Haven't they got more pressing issues to concern themselves with?

Alex McKee · 14-06-2008, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland

The issue of the royal family is Britain's and the British peoples. It's none of the UN's business.

Exactly what I was going to say. I'm absolutely disgusted that the UN has waded in on this. They should mind their bloody own business!

Kevin Adamson · 14-06-2008, 05:13 AM

The sri lanken envoy should be apprehended at the earliest opportunity and locked in the Tower. There he can undergo a series of educational lessons of the stupidity of Ceylon on withdr................O sod it , OFF WITH HIS HEAD!

The Bear · 14-06-2008, 07:58 AM

I believe that it is time for a change and that the Windsor’s should be pensioned off though the prospect of having a creature like Mrs. Blair as “First Lady” appals me, and not just because it makes for an oxymoron.

Instead an elected head of state AND a written constitution seems to be wall past the date that it should have been introduced.

Having got that off my chest what I also very firmly believe is that the UN should be dismantled and the sooner the better to be replaced with an international body in which the present trading in votes for favours is at least minimised.

The UN was constituted for the world during WW2 and in spite of having evolved since then its evolution has been driven by politics rather than need.

What is now required is an international body that is put together with charters based on what is needed today.

What is there today can’t be changed, it’s got too much baggage.

Presently the UN is part of “The Problem”. What we need is an international body that is part of providing solutions.

Bit of a shame it won’t happen though unless something like that which saw the demise of the League of Nations comes along, and it’s looking increasingly like that’s what’s going to soon happen.

rjt · 14-06-2008, 08:46 AM

Mercifully there still seems strong support for the monarchy in this country, the love and respect felt in thiscountry for HMQ is felt across the world, she is admired for her dignity and her dedication and rightly so.

From time to time the republican movement have tried to cash in on the royals personal difficulties only to recieve a bloody nose every time, most recently this was witnessed during the Golden Jubilee where there was a national outpouing of loyalty to the monarch.

It is time the republican movement gave up a retired to a museum, with th rest of the Dinosaurs!

Britannist · 14-06-2008, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjt

RJT wrote......strong support for the Monarchy in this country, the love and respect felt in this country for HMQ is felt across the world: she is admired for her dignity and her dedication and rightly so.

Queen Elizabeth II (Queen Elizabeth 1 of Scotland): an outstanding Monarch of 130 million people around the world. Long May She Reign.

Quote:

RJT wrote:It is time the republican movement gave up a retired to a museum, with the rest of the Dinosaurs!

Seconded with great enthusiasm (if you can call the republican campaigners here in the UK a movement - more like a minuscule group on the fringe).

Tom Wilde · 14-06-2008, 10:47 PM

Astonishing!

Unlike many here, I am a strong supporter of the UN, despite its many flaws. However, this is definitely none of their business. It is up to us whether we keep our monarchy or not. (And incidentally, I think we should keep it!)

I suppose you may always get the odd envoy who goes a bit gaga and suggests something stupid, but a sensible chairman should have made sure that his contribution was tactfully deleted from the record, not included as a recommendation in an official report!

BonnieDundee · 15-06-2008, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Britannist

Queen Elizabeth II (Queen Elizabeth 1 of Scotland): an outstanding Monarch of 130 million people around the world. Long May She Reign.

You mean Francis II of Scotland.

Quote:

Seconded with great enthusiasm (if you can call the republican campaigners here in the UK a movement - more like a minuscule group on the fringe).

Rather like Monarchists in Australia.

13-06-2008, 10:51 PM	#1 (permalink)
ukiprule Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 375 Party: UKIP	UN: Should Britain scrap Royals? I think they should take a running jump UN: Should Britain scrap Royals? - Yahoo! News UK __________________ Membership of the European Union costs Britain £60.1 billion per annum UKIP wants to leave the European Union and spend the money here in Britain. To put this figure in perspective, just £1 billion would pay for: 222,000 hip replacements Or 46,893 nurses Or 38,782 teachers Or 34, 585 police officers Agree? Join UKIP www.ukip.org

14-06-2008, 07:58 AM	#6 (permalink)
The Bear Uber Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: East Anglia Posts: 2,178	I believe that it is time for a change and that the Windsor’s should be pensioned off though the prospect of having a creature like Mrs. Blair as “First Lady” appals me, and not just because it makes for an oxymoron. Instead an elected head of state AND a written constitution seems to be wall past the date that it should have been introduced. Having got that off my chest what I also very firmly believe is that the UN should be dismantled and the sooner the better to be replaced with an international body in which the present trading in votes for favours is at least minimised. The UN was constituted for the world during WW2 and in spite of having evolved since then its evolution has been driven by politics rather than need. What is now required is an international body that is put together with charters based on what is needed today. What is there today can’t be changed, it’s got too much baggage. Presently the UN is part of “The Problem”. What we need is an international body that is part of providing solutions. Bit of a shame it won’t happen though unless something like that which saw the demise of the League of Nations comes along, and it’s looking increasingly like that’s what’s going to soon happen. __________________ I am an old man. I have eaten much salt.

14-06-2008, 08:46 AM	#7 (permalink)
rjt Uber Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Aldershot Posts: 5,292	Mercifully there still seems strong support for the monarchy in this country, the love and respect felt in thiscountry for HMQ is felt across the world, she is admired for her dignity and her dedication and rightly so. From time to time the republican movement have tried to cash in on the royals personal difficulties only to recieve a bloody nose every time, most recently this was witnessed during the Golden Jubilee where there was a national outpouing of loyalty to the monarch. It is time the republican movement gave up a retired to a museum, with th rest of the Dinosaurs! __________________ Mr Delors said that he wanted the European Parliament to be the democratic body of the community, The Commission to be The Executive and The Council Of Ministers The Senate. NO! NO! NO! (Margaret Thatcher 30 Oct 1990) Ignore List: The Prophets of ST Al the Unelectable.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

13-06-2008, 11:02 PM	#2 (permalink)
Roland Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 857	Wile the royal family have proved beyond all shadow of a doubt that they are a wast of oxygen, time and money, what the hell have the UN got to do with it. The UN is supposed to be a international body that deals with international issues. The issue of the royal family is Britain's and the British peoples. It's none of the UN's business.

13-06-2008, 11:21 PM	#3 (permalink)
Northumbrian Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, England Posts: 1,178 Party: Free England Party	Haven't they got more pressing issues to concern themselves with?

14-06-2008, 05:13 AM	#5 (permalink)
Kevin Adamson Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Surrey Posts: 864 Party: UKIP	The sri lanken envoy should be apprehended at the earliest opportunity and locked in the Tower. There he can undergo a series of educational lessons of the stupidity of Ceylon on withdr................O sod it , OFF WITH HIS HEAD!

14-06-2008, 10:47 PM	#9 (permalink)
Tom Wilde Moderator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: London. Posts: 2,774	Astonishing! Unlike many here, I am a strong supporter of the UN, despite its many flaws. However, this is definitely none of their business. It is up to us whether we keep our monarchy or not. (And incidentally, I think we should keep it!) I suppose you may always get the odd envoy who goes a bit gaga and suggests something stupid, but a sensible chairman should have made sure that his contribution was tactfully deleted from the record, not included as a recommendation in an official report!