Royals cost Britain £37m a year

[Blackleaf]

I would like zara philips to come to my bedroom ,i would give her some serious exercise    

695720[/snapback]

You'll just have to make sure that the England international rugby player that she's dating doesn't catch you.

[Blackleaf]

In 1890 the population of Palestine was 8% Jews. One hundred years later, it was 55%. Israel's founders destroyed over 453 Palestinian towns and villages and exiled 800,000 Palestinians. Now, there are more than 4 million Palestinian refugees.

Democratic, "caring" Israel.

[warden]

I would like zara philips to come to my bedroom ,i would give her some serious exercise    

695720[/snapback]

You'll just have to make sure that the England international rugby player that she's dating doesn't catch you.

696198[/snapback]

After watching the way they have been playing their rugby,there would be no chance of that

[whoa182]

61 p .. lol

nothing to freak out over..

[Erikl]

But you treat Palestinians far worse than any slaves were treated.

You have to remember that israel slaughtered thousands of innocent men, women, and children in Shatila refugee camp in 1982.

And 93% of Israel is a "Jewish Only" area.

Yeah, Israel is a real beacon of democracy.

696195[/snapback]

Again, wrong.

First of all, as you saw in my example, the Israeli Palestinians, that is - Palestinians who are citizens of this country, are treated as equal citizens.

You ofcourse and people alike will ignore this fact, because it messes up your world view of evil Israel.

The Palestinians in the disputed territories ARE NOT citizens of the state of Israel, because those territories have never been annexed to Israel. For example, the Palestinians and Arabs of the Golan Heights and Eastern Jerusalem, which were annexed into Israel and are part of the state of Israel, have the same rights as other Israeli Palestinians.

the 2.8-3.5 million Palestinians who live in the disputed territories live in legally nowhere lands, because those lands legally belong to no one (this is why most of the laws in the territories are still Ottomans, as they were the last legal owners of this land). They had Jordanian and Egyptian citizenship between 1949-1967, but the Egyptians cancelled their citizenship after 1977, and the Jordanians after 1988 (speaking about democratic moves... cancelling people's citizenship.. how democratic ).

As for Israel treatment of it's Palestinian population (Israeli Palestinians) - it is the best in the middle east! even the Palestinians which live outside of Israel in the disputed territories, are being treated much better than the other 4 million Palestinians who live in ARAB countries. The sad irony and hypocricy is that the Arab countries who use the Palestinians as a weapon against Israel in the minds of the international public treat them far worse than Israel ever has.

As for the geography of Israel - again, no knowledge whatsoever about my country... Arabs can and do live everywhere they want in Israel - from the Negev desert in the south to the streets of Tel-Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem.

Not only that, but 22% of the land west to the Jordan river are bound by the world to be Judenfrei - "free of Jews" lands, because one of the basic demands of the Palestinians is that there would be no Jews in their future country... how democratic is that.

This is to complete the exile of 900,000 Arab Jews from Arab lands back in 1948... Jews who lived in those lands even before the Arab invaders came from the Arabian peninsula.

As for Sabra and Shatila massacre - again, total rubbish. Israel had no part in it, as I've shown and explained countless times, but facts obviously are of no interest to you.

  In 1890 the population of Palestine was 8% Jews. One hundred years later, it was 55%. Israel's founders destroyed over 453 Palestinian towns and villages and exiled 800,000 Palestinians. Now, there are more than 4 million Palestinian refugees.

In the year 134, the population of Judea (no Palestine back then... sorry... the Romans haven't kicked us yet and renamed the land) was about 90%+ Jewish-Israelite (meaning Jews, Christians and Samaritans).

After a genocide of about 500,000 Jews, and a continous persecution of Jews and Samaritans by first Romans, then Byzantines, then Arabs, then Crusaders, then Seljuks, then Turks, indeed almost all Jews were killed or converted to Islam\Christianity.

The lastest round of Jew-killings started by Palestinian extremists back in 1920 in ancient Jewish communities in Hebron, Gaza, Jenin, Sefad etc., and is continuing to these days.

Then in the year 1948, 900,000 Jews from all over the Arab world have been exiled and robbed off their lands and belongings, ending history of about 2,500 of Jewish presence in places like Iraq (ancient Mesopotamia), Syria (ancient Aram), Lebanon, etc..

Nowdays places like Jordan and Saudi Arabia forbid Jews from gaining citizenship or even enter their territory.

Too bad some anti-Semites like Blackleaf can't handle the fact that now for the first time since the year 135, Jews actually have a military to defend themselves, and do not let others to abuse them and kill them as they pleased.

And one interesting fact regarding the year 1890... even back then, Jerusalem had Jewish majority .

[SnakeProphet]

You two should start an Israel thread.

BTW, an interesting thing I noticed is,that Blackleaf keeps bringing up that massacre.

[Erikl]

You two should start an Israel thread.

BTW, an interesting thing I noticed is,that Blackleaf keeps bringing up that massacre.

696652[/snapback]

I have no wish to open a thread on a specific country with him, because if it's not the UK, and better be England, then it's primitive\dark\evil\backward etc..

I think it should be clear by now what his views are.

As for the massacre he keeps bringing up - I don't care how long he'll continue to bring up that lie, it won't change the facts and make it true.

Especially when he just keeps bringing that up and ignores the facts that are presented to him.

Look how he used to mention other facts, but when I managed to prove him wrong again again, he eventually came with other lies.

And another interesting and disturbing phenomenon is that he is keep taking threads off-topic, and for what? to attack different countries.

Why did he attack Israel this time? simply because I am an Israeli.

He disagreed with what I was saying, so instead of replying to the point, he attacked my country of origin.

Real mature, eh?

That guy should learn how to participate in a forum and take criticism without resolving into personal insults.

But what can one expect from a guy that has superiority-complex?

"England England über alles", isn't that so mr Blackleaf?

[SnakeProphet]

As for the massacre he keeps bringing up - I don't care how long he'll continue to bring up that lie, it won't change the facts and make it true.

Especially when he just keeps bringing that up and ignores the facts that are presented to him.

Look how he used to mention other facts, but when I managed to prove him wrong again again, he eventually came with other lies.

I won't comment on that massacre,since you're doing a pretty good job without me.The thing is he keeps mentioning that massacre,while he doesn't seem to care to prove you wrong on your argument.

"England England über alles",

I can actually sing that.

Edited June 24, 2005 by Snake_6024

[Rachael]

If all the money they spent each year was sent to charity - that would be a good thing!

And there are always charity workers. 

They arnt necessary!

695642[/snapback]

Well, there's gratitude. Prince Charles has created a charity to help disadvantaged young people, but those young people shouldn't at least pay 61p per year for the Royal Family and demand the monarchy to be abolished? Hmmmm.

You're Australian. If you all want to get rid of the monarchy, you shouldn't have voted FOR the monarchy in the 1999 referendum. You should have voted for the more expensive version - a Republican.

Most British people are monarchists. The monarchy is a symbol of our country, and having a Queen as Head of States is much better than having a corrupt President as Head of State like they do in France and Italy.

695656[/snapback]

But what has Prince Charles done for the young people of Australia???

As for voting them to keep hanging around - I would like to see a referendum done again in 2009 - when some more of the oldies are no longer with us! That vote would probably not happen again the same way.

I dont know much about a Republic being more expensive - so I will take your word for it.

But I would not like Australia to end up like America either (sorry if I offend any americans) because I don't think their systems are too grand either.

So really all I know is that I don't appreciate paying any amount of tax dollars to keep a British Monarch in place - when we do not gain any 'tourist' dollars back in regards to them.

So Blackleaf explain why the British Monarch is of any benefit to Australia.

Cheers.

[Commander CMG]

Hmmm... I wonder why they chose to leave the Security expenses out of the final figure?? maybe perhaps it would far exceed the 37Mill they have quoted at the moment?

[warden]

Hmmm... I wonder why they chose to leave the Security expenses out of the final figure?? maybe perhaps it would far exceed the 37Mill they have quoted at the moment?

697314[/snapback]

The price you pay for security these days are high,but you know what they say,you get what you pay for and the royals should have the best

How much is to much?

I still think Princess Anne should let ZARA become patron of the scotish rugby team

[Commander CMG]

I agree they should get the best but the figure quoted is not a true reflection on the actual costs the tax payer has to dish out to secure the Royals and their quality of security over recent years has definately declined.

[warden]

I agree they should get the best but the figure quoted is not a true reflection on the actual costs the tax payer has to dish out to secure the Royals and their quality of security over recent years has definately declined.

697450[/snapback]

Their budget has fallen in the last few years,do youthink that has something to do with their security declining?

They should have the best,like blair,irelands secetary,etc

[Blackleaf]

You two should start an Israel thread.

BTW, an interesting thing I noticed is,that Blackleaf keeps bringing up that massacre.

696652[/snapback]

That's because whenever me and Erik are talking about Israel and I mention that 1982 massacre he goes strangely quiet. But he's quick to talk about Palaestinian suicide bombers, but whenever I mention the massacre of innocent Palestinian civilians by Israeli soldiers, ordered by Sharon, or the fact that Israeli soldiers have a tendency to rape Palestinian women, he goes all quiet.

[Blackleaf]

You two should start an Israel thread.

BTW, an interesting thing I noticed is,that Blackleaf keeps bringing up that massacre.

696652[/snapback]

I have no wish to open a thread on a specific country with him, because if it's not the UK, and better be England, then it's primitive\dark\evil\backward etc..

I think it should be clear by now what his views are.

As for the massacre he keeps bringing up - I don't care how long he'll continue to bring up that lie, it won't change the facts and make it true.

Especially when he just keeps bringing that up and ignores the facts that are presented to him.

Look how he used to mention other facts, but when I managed to prove him wrong again again, he eventually came with other lies.

And another interesting and disturbing phenomenon is that he is keep taking threads off-topic, and for what? to attack different countries.

Why did he attack Israel this time? simply because I am an Israeli.

He disagreed with what I was saying, so instead of replying to the point, he attacked my country of origin.

Real mature, eh?

That guy should learn how to participate in a forum and take criticism without resolving into personal insults.

But what can one expect from a guy that has superiority-complex?

"England England über alles", isn't that so mr Blackleaf?

696777[/snapback]

You ignore the facts. Everytime I mention the Shatila massacre, you go all quiet.

Have you got a guilty conscience?

Us in Britain know that the Israelis are the bad guys, but the Israelis can't see it, and think everyone loves them.

[warden]

You two should start an Israel thread.

BTW, an interesting thing I noticed is,that Blackleaf keeps bringing up that massacre.

696652[/snapback]

That's because whenever me and Erik are talking about Israel and I mention that 1982 massacre he goes strangely quiet. But he's quick to talk about Palaestinian suicide bombers, but whenever I mention the massacre of innocent Palestinian civilians by Israeli soldiers, ordered by Sharon, or the fact that Israeli soldiers have a tendency to rape Palestinian women, he goes all quiet.

697566[/snapback]

Well just ignore his isrealie comments like the rest of us and in no time he will take the hint and post it on the thread it desearves

[Blackleaf]

If all the money they spent each year was sent to charity - that would be a good thing!

And there are always charity workers. 

They arnt necessary!

695642[/snapback]

Well, there's gratitude. Prince Charles has created a charity to help disadvantaged young people, but those young people shouldn't at least pay 61p per year for the Royal Family and demand the monarchy to be abolished? Hmmmm.

You're Australian. If you all want to get rid of the monarchy, you shouldn't have voted FOR the monarchy in the 1999 referendum. You should have voted for the more expensive version - a Republican.

Most British people are monarchists. The monarchy is a symbol of our country, and having a Queen as Head of States is much better than having a corrupt President as Head of State like they do in France and Italy.

695656[/snapback]

But what has Prince Charles done for the young people of Australia???

As for voting them to keep hanging around - I would like to see a referendum done again in 2009 - when some more of the oldies are no longer with us! That vote would probably not happen again the same way.

I dont know much about a Republic being more expensive - so I will take your word for it.

But I would not like Australia to end up like America either (sorry if I offend any americans) because I don't think their systems are too grand either.

So really all I know is that I don't appreciate paying any amount of tax dollars to keep a British Monarch in place - when we do not gain any 'tourist' dollars back in regards to them.

So Blackleaf explain why the British Monarch is of any benefit to Australia.

Cheers.

696850[/snapback]

I didn't say it was of any benefit to Australia. I just said that most Australians want the monarchy because they voted to keep it.

I just know that it's beneficial to Britain, and it's a symbol of Britishness. Britain just wouldn't be the same with a Republic. We've been a Republic before just after the English Civil War when Oliver Cromwell was our leader, but that only lasted about 3 or 4 years and we reverted back to having a monarchy again.

[Commander CMG]

I though I jumped into the wrong discussion... lets keep focused?

[Blackleaf]

In fact, the Constitutional Monarchy has a lot of benefits for Australia.

Read this.

Australia's Constitutional Monarchy

Its benefits and its relevance for the 21st Century and beyond

BY PHILIP BENWELL MBE, NATIONAL CHAIRMAN OF THE MONARCHIST LEAGUE OF AUSTRALIA

In the years leading up to Federation, the Colonies which made up Australia enjoyed a great measure of independence in their Government, but it was not by any means free of rule from London.

The first initiative, however, towards independence emanated with the Australian Colonies Government Act of 1850 (UK Parliament) which invited the Colonies to put forward proposals for a House of Representatives or some other form of responsible Government.

Despite this initiative, it was not really until the 1880's that the concept of federation received serious support within the Australian Colonies.

Some may like to feel that this support emanated from a greater sense of national pride. After all in the latter years of the nineteenth century the native born inhabitants far outnumbered the immigrants. However in reality the real push towards federation was an economic one to establish a national market free of inter-colonial interests.

Whatever the reason for federation, one must not forget that Queen Victoria and the Parliament of the United Kingdom not only allowed but encouraged the Colonies of Australia to federate and to enjoy self government.

The Parliament of the United Kingdom was the only legal entity through which an Act could be enacted to create the Federation. There was no other format through which this could be accomplished.

Through all these proceedings, Britain was a willing partner. It was in no way a grasping Imperial power from which Australians had to fight for the democratic freedom that is now the right of every person in this country.

Over the years those few ties which remained to the British Government were removed freely and without dissent.

Today there are a great number of Australians who are indeed regretting the removal of the right to appeal to the Privy Council!

The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, passed by the House of Commons in July 1900 and enacted formally on the 1st January 1901, was a document resulting from a number of deliberations, submissions and proposals all of which involved Australians. The proposal was put before the Australian People for their decision in the form of a series of referendums.

It can therefore be said that this Act was drafted by Australians for Australians and voted upon by the People of Australia. It is accordingly intrinsically an Australian document whatever others may infer. It obtained our independence from our former colonial masters and preserves it from those politicians who would be our future masters.

The draftsmen of the Constitution, rightly called the "Founding Fathers", were brilliant in their farsightedness. They created a form of Government which took the best from the Westminster System, from Canada, the United States and from Switzerland, two of which were monarchical and two stable republican. The result was a perfect blend of democratic ideals and built-in safeguards. As Sir Zelman Cowan mentioned "The Sovereign has, under a constitutional monarchy such as ours, three rights - the right to be consulted, the right to encourage and the right to warn."

These safeguards are the only protection the People of Australia have against the excesses of those in political power. No other method of government has ever been able to ensure the constitutional stability and continuity of the life of the nation. To remove these safeguards and particularly to remove the ultimate authority vested in the Sovereign to appoint and dismiss the Governor General, albeit now governed by strict convention, will leave the democracy of this country subject to possible violation.

Republicans have no alternative other than to put a politician - who by his very nature will be biased - in place of a Sovereign who has no political party to obey, only Her desire to see to the well-being of Her Peoples. Even though a President may be selected from outside the political spectrum! he or she will need to receive the support of the Parliaments and would therefore owe existence to those who would lobby on his or her behalf within the Parliaments. The Sovereign owes no allegiance to any particular person or organisation, only to the People. It was to prevent Parliament from replacing the Crown with one of their own that the Founding Fathers ensured that the position of the Sovereign was inviolate except upon change of the Constitution by referendum.

The twentieth Century has seen vast changes in the governance of the World. Many monarchies were toppled and were exchanged for republican forms of Government. Although absolute monarchies have no place in the democratic ideals of today, most were replaced by absolute dictatorships of the Orwellian kind which in many instances were far worse.

Since the French Revolution of 1789, some three fourths of the nations in the world now describe themselves as republics. However only a very few could be actually said to be democracies.

In fact, of the more than 180 countries being member nations of the United Nations, only 26 could be probably regarded as true democracies. Of these twenty are Constitutional Monarchies. Many are either in the midst of a befuddled and laborious road to democracy, or are governed by totally despotic and undemocratic regimes.

Those countries, however, which had progressed towards a constitutional monarchical form of Government - few though they were - symbolise the very essence of a modern democracy.

The only difference between the Constitutional Monarchy of Australia and that of such countries as Denmark, Holland, Sweden and Thailand is that we have as our Sovereign a person who is also Queen of Great Britain and independently that of fifteen other countries.

The question that the People of Australia must consider is whether having Queen Elizabeth as our Queen is so deleterious that they would want to place total trust in the hands of their politicians.

The comments that have been made by supposed Monarchists that the Chief Justice should assume the role of appointing or dismissing the Governor General, relegating the Crown to a vacuity will not only nullify the very essence of our Constitution but would seriously endanger the legal impartiality of the Chief Justice and his high Court.

Either we accept the far reaching and often comforting provisions of our Constitution as a Constitutional Monarchy or we change totally to a republic. We cannot hang onto the security of the Crown, whilst watering down or invalidating its relevance. It is not fair to do this to the Australian People and it is certainly not fair to The Queen.

Many express concern about the behaviour of the younger Royals. However this is but a momentary aberration and is but typical of behaviour of their generation. One must remember that The Queen's direct family have been on the Throne for over one thousand years, since Egbert of Wessex in 802!

The Australian Constitution has served this country quell. Many may claim - arid possibly rightly so - that it is not perfect. However in many instances, such as the centralisation of power to Canberra blame should not be placed on the Constitution but laid at the foot of our political representatives who have caused this to happen.

In New South Wales we have seen how the Constitution of the State has prevented the Premier from arbitrarily amending the Oath of Allegiance in the State and from downgrading the position of Governor and the relevance of Government House.

Constitutions are meant to be solid documents. Not company articles changed to suit every Board. The Constitution enshrines within itself the protection of the People's democracy. As such it has relevance to Australians just as much today as it had ninety-six years ago. It is in this regard particularly upsetting that, according to the survey made by the Civics Expert Group appointed by the Keating Government in 1994 only IX percent of the adult population of Australia had any knowledge of the content of their constitution!

As far as the future is concerned, who can possible tell what the twenty-first century may bring. However if you allow the Constitution to be changed just because you may be disappointed with the performance of The Queen 's children or because. due to a deliberate lack of civics education in Australia's educational process, not many young people arc aware of the relevance of the Crown in our Constitution. not only will the heritage passed on to us by our Founding Fathers be betrayed. but also more importantly, the future security of our children and their children.

The ultimate question for the future is: Can a republic guarantee the independence. sovereignty. national interests and last but not least, the individual and civil rights of the citizenry as a Constitutional Monarchy has done and can continue to do so'?

http://www.pastornet.net.au/fwn/1997/mar/art05.htm

Edited June 25, 2005 by Blackleaf

[SnakeProphet]

That's because whenever me and Erik are talking about Israel and I mention that 1982 massacre he goes strangely quiet. But he's quick to talk about Palaestinian suicide bombers, but whenever I mention the massacre of innocent Palestinian civilians by Israeli soldiers, ordered by Sharon, or the fact that Israeli soldiers have a tendency to rape Palestinian women, he goes all quiet.

Actually he provided you some facts 2 or 3 times now,but you didn't comment on that.

[warden]

You know what the ozzie`s are like,straight to the point,so if they didnt want the Monarchy to have any part of Australia they would have booted them into touch a long time ago ,they have not so that tells me something

[Blackleaf]

That's because whenever me and Erik are talking about Israel and I mention that 1982 massacre he goes strangely quiet. But he's quick to talk about Palaestinian suicide bombers, but whenever I mention the massacre of innocent Palestinian civilians by Israeli soldiers, ordered by Sharon, or the fact that Israeli soldiers have a tendency to rape Palestinian women, he goes all quiet.

Actually he provided you some facts 2 or 3 times now,but you didn't comment on that.

697580[/snapback]

He either didn't mention anything about the Shatila massacre, or if he did I've not seen it and he'll be trying to tell me that the Israelis were justified when they massacred those people.

[Erikl]

You two should start an Israel thread.

BTW, an interesting thing I noticed is,that Blackleaf keeps bringing up that massacre.

696652[/snapback]

I have no wish to open a thread on a specific country with him, because if it's not the UK, and better be England, then it's primitive\dark\evil\backward etc..

I think it should be clear by now what his views are.

As for the massacre he keeps bringing up - I don't care how long he'll continue to bring up that lie, it won't change the facts and make it true.

Especially when he just keeps bringing that up and ignores the facts that are presented to him.

Look how he used to mention other facts, but when I managed to prove him wrong again again, he eventually came with other lies.

And another interesting and disturbing phenomenon is that he is keep taking threads off-topic, and for what? to attack different countries.

Why did he attack Israel this time? simply because I am an Israeli.

He disagreed with what I was saying, so instead of replying to the point, he attacked my country of origin.

Real mature, eh?

That guy should learn how to participate in a forum and take criticism without resolving into personal insults.

But what can one expect from a guy that has superiority-complex?

"England England über alles", isn't that so mr Blackleaf?

696777[/snapback]

You ignore the facts. Everytime I mention the Shatila massacre, you go all quiet.

Have you got a guilty conscience?

Us in Britain know that the Israelis are the bad guys, but the Israelis can't see it, and think everyone loves them.

697569[/snapback]

More lies .

Will you ever stop?

Several members here can be called upon as witnesses that that not only I haven't gone quite over your false alligations, but I refuted them over and over again, until by the 10th time I simply got tired of doing so.

I have no guilty conscience whatsoever.

It is you, who instead of staying on topic and tackle the issues raised, start attacking members on their ethnic or national origin.

"us in Britain"? you mean a bunch of anti-Semites such as yourself and others over there who are busy destroying Jewish graveyards over there and support the killing of Jews here?

Another proof that you have no knowledge about Israel or Israelis - not only we are fully aware that we are not liked in this world thanks to people like yourself who spread poison and lies against us, but as opposed to you Blackleaf, we do not live in a delusional world thinking our country is the best in the world.

Jews have been fully aware that they are disliked by many people for as long as we exist as a nation.

We just don't give a d*mn.

I think it is you who feels guilty, for whatever reasons, hence why you have this urge to compare Britain and especially England to every country on earth, showing how it is better than every other country.

Well just ignore his isrealie comments like the rest of us and in no time he will take the hint and post it on the thread it desearves

Are you reffering to me?

Cause I think anyone here can see I'm not the one starting to take threads off-topic, talking on my country.

And I do belive I have every right to speak against people who trash my country by repeatedly spreading lies and propaganda.

[warden]

That goes to everybody Erikle not just you,if it keeps going of line this thread will be closed

[Erikl]

That's because whenever me and Erik are talking about Israel and I mention that 1982 massacre he goes strangely quiet. But he's quick to talk about Palaestinian suicide bombers, but whenever I mention the massacre of innocent Palestinian civilians by Israeli soldiers, ordered by Sharon, or the fact that Israeli soldiers have a tendency to rape Palestinian women, he goes all quiet.

Actually he provided you some facts 2 or 3 times now,but you didn't comment on that.

697580[/snapback]

He either didn't mention anything about the Shatila massacre, or if he did I've not seen it and he'll be trying to tell me that the Israelis were justified when they massacred those people.

697591[/snapback]

lol didn't see it...

you replied to the same threads, or simply when I refuted your claims gone to another thread and took it to off-topicness by spreading your lies over there....

I have no wish to continue allowing you to abuse threads, but if you'll continue to use threads to attack my country using lies and spreading your anti-semitic nationalistic poison, I'll have no choice but continue refuting you.

Or, if you'll continue anyhow, I'll have no choice but to request the mods to ban you.

I think enough evidence to favour such a descision has been gathered in the last few months.

Your anti-french flooding, anti-scot bashing, your anti-europe trashing, your continouse flooding of this catagory with UK superiority threads, and your tendency to personally attack members' countries and taking threads off-topic.

Leave or learn how to participate in forums.

Next time I'll simply PM one of the mods.