PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Forgotten your Username/Password?


Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 18th Mar 2011, 23:45   #1 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: On the ground for now.
Posts: 276
End the Brit monarchy.

This is a fun read but please be forewarned, you must be very open minded.


(I will most likely be banned forever from the Prune, but what the heck)


End of the British Monarchy.

(A view from an American blogger & columnist)

Non Politically Correct Humor Column » SammonSays

John W. Sammon
April 09, 2009

Okay, let´s end it, finito!

That ages-old scam, the British Monarchy.

The queen, her royal highness, is a little high after ingesting a gin tonic at a reception amid her fawning sycophants. What is she thinking? "I must appear royal. I must. I´m stoned."

What does she think when she goes to the toilet? "I´m royal, and I´m on the toilet. I´m descended from heaven."
Royal poo all stinks just like everyone elses.

C´mon!

This little island country less than half the size of France whose inhabitants used to paint themselves blue and lived in caves eating rotten boar entrails at a time when street lighting had been invented and libraries of higher learning opened in Babylon.

This little realm that managed to subdue what were termed savages with dark skins all around the world because it built a navy, represented by people who have so little sunlight in their own country and whose skin is so white that it practically glows in the dark.

They committed the biggest rip-off in world history.

The Brits have so much to be ashamed of with their monarchy.
Henry´s chopping the heads off seven wives, another king murdering the child twins in the Tower of London, British soldiers massacring stone-age Zulu warriors with Henry repeating rifles, their compatriots enslaving the entire continent of India, which again was a civilized society long before England´s claims to be.

Incest, stealing, bigamy, adultery, robbing, murdering, with a flag and a Bible at close hand. Right up to our own time. This realm, this little ole England!

The savages they once ruled across the globe were often horrified at the brutality of the British, one savage to another.

The list of English misdeeds goes on. Using China as an opium den.

Murdering and starving millions of Irish during the potato famine, and laughing about it.

The Brits, the people, seem proud of this history for some reason, as though because of Shakespeare alone, the Union Jack represents some kind of enlightenment.

Here comes the queen. Yell "God save the queen! How many times have they tried to save her.
Maybe it should be "God damn the queen!"

See how daintily the queen extends her hand, displaying her jewels (stolen from the former Ceylon and other places). Her consort, the tall, eagle-looking Prince Philip, descended from German warlords, the people who brought you the Holocaust, changed his German name to a more English sounding one.

The British at one point literally ripped the gold band off the top of the Parthenon in Athens and looted it back to England. A pack of ocean-going thieves. How did they do it? How did they at one time rule and steal the world?

They built a navy with big guns. They could sail around the world terrorizing natives who had no navy and them trying to fight back with nothing but their own bodies.
We pound ourselves on the chest that we´re the victors. We feel no shame fighting a country much smaller and poorer than we are.

Today, the British island is only a shell of what it once was, with a GNP lower than that of Los Angeles, and a lackey to the United States.
Every time the US enters a war, England obediently follows along like a little lap dog.

But it still has its queen, who exercises no real power of command, but is a figurehead, riding in her carriage, waving her little bejeweled hand next to her womanizing inbred son with his oddly shaped, duck-like head, and her grandson in his Nazi uniform off at some punk party. She still has her jewels.

People still bow and scrape. Why?
The monarchies of Russia and Germany were disposed of long ago.

The answer is this. The Brits are the only imperialists who became expert, developed it to a fine art. They told you how wonderful you were, even though it was implied that you were beneath them.
They learned never to tell you this directly to your face, that you were less. But they acted haughty, above it all.

You were lucky to be their personal underling. You knew it too.
You are a subject of the dam crown.

The Germans. They used to be brutal. They´d tell you right to your face they were better than you. Then they´d take a whip to you, if you were as the English like to put it, a "bloody savage."

The Brits, they didn´t make the mistake the Germans did, being overbearing to the point of unbearable. They´d speak in that lilting poetic tone they have, and talk about you being part of a "commonwealth."

See how they use the word "commonwealth," like you as a bloody savage were sharing in it, the wealth, when in fact you weren´t. They were stripping your poor country raw and shipping everything of value back to England. Commonwealth was just pure theft. Meanwhile beggars abound and good descent folk scrape by trying to make ends meet.

They treated you as though you were lucky to have them as overlords, as though it was some kind of higher state than your own miserable wretched situation,
like you couldn´t take care of yourself because you weren´t intelligent enough. You were childlike.

You needed the guidance of the British. It was as if you were almost, not quite, but almost, one of them.

Millions of people bought into this. But then if you objected, they´d take a whip to you, and throw you in jail, or simply murder you, if you were as they put it, a "bloody savage" living on an easily conquered tiny exotic island.

The British are a little more circumspect today, but no less arrogant when it comes to their royalty including their inflated ego about themselves.

Why are some Americans so impressed with the English monarchy, instead of laughing at it?
They fought for their independence to get rid of this sham.

Because, despite our power, despite that fact that we rule the world as a colossus, we´re still (to the English, and to ourselves) a bunch of ignorant, white trash hillbillies, impressed by the mere trappings of power.
For all our imagined sophistication, we know this to be true, that they´re better. This is what we still think, many of us, in the recesses of our subconscious. In a computer world, it´s still gold, jewels, crowns, platinum dinner plates, and purple embossed toilet paper that matter.

And glamour. And fancy cars. It´s things. They have a lot of things. Royal things.

In other words, it´s still a case of, if you give the natives trinkets, or if you have them or wear them yourself, it makes the ignorant natives happy.

To the English, we´re still a bunch of nose picking, egg suckin, ass-scratchin,´ belching, farting ignorant low-rent hay kicking village idiots who better bow and scrape in the presence of the queen…..or else.

"Your majesty."

It all sounds so lovely. This little nondescript woman descended from God.
Did God put the crown on her head? No.
The murder of people put that crown there.

As long as there are white trash hillbillies willing to bow, where the queen can lord it over them, from those wanting to be lorded, the English monarchy will live on.

A Brit reading this might say, "how dare you say that?"

My answer would be, it´s easy, it´s easy, it´s so easy, to dare.

Copyright 2009 Sammonsays
unmanned transport is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2011, 23:49   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: On the ground for now.
Posts: 276
Name Change.

The UQ....not the UK.

How in the heck do ya'll call the islands the UK when a female runs the show!
Dammit from now on it will be known as the UQ, remember that.
unmanned transport is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 00:29   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Ex-pat Aussie in the UK
Posts: 2,703
Quote:
The Brits have so much to be ashamed of with their monarchy.
Henry´s chopping the heads off seven wives, another king murdering the child twins in the Tower of London, British soldiers massacring stone-age Zulu warriors with Henry repeating rifles, their compatriots enslaving the entire continent of India, which again was a civilized society long before England´s claims to be.
I'm not a monarchist, however I have sworn allegiance three times in my life. At least I know some history.

Divorced, Beheaded, Died, Divorced, Beheaded, Survived. Old Henry only chopped the heads of two EX-wives (marriages annulled before death - so no wives killed!) The twins in the Tower accusation was popularised by Shakespeare, maligning Richard the third - and you only need know his patron to understand why. etc etc.

If you would put an argument - it would be best that you not begin by holding yourself up to ridicule for ignorance of the very subject you are soapboxing.
Checkboard is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 02:38   #4 (permalink)
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Victoria, Australia.
Posts: 2,784
I read about one quarter of the 'article' but it is so full of bile and basic inaccuracies that I gave up there.
parabellum is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 03:15   #5 (permalink)
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: A Whilom nimble brain. With 31 million posts.
Age: 73
Posts: 3,375
Who would type 1,291 words of sierra hotel one tango, and then claim copyright?
Loose rivets is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 03:22   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: On the ground for now.
Posts: 276
By the way, I should have clarified the UQ.
United Queendom for pete's sake. Got it?

Now with AN OPEN MIND please read what the Yank has written.
unmanned transport is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 03:28   #7 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: On the ground for now.
Posts: 276
A hereditary monarch representing the feudal society of medieval England is intolerable in a modern democratic state. It represents the pinnacle of the anachronistic class system in Britain, promoting social division, snobbery, and separating them form ordinary hard working people. Britain will never become a meritocracy, where people are given opportunities according to their ability, not according to their birth, if the monarchy remains. As long as the monarchy survives, so will the class system in Britain.It is unacceptable that the British tax payer should be paying £85,000,000 a year to support one of the richest families in Britain (wealth accumulated of course from the people during previous centuries). That would pay the University tuition fees of 85,000 of the poorest students, fund 28 new secondary schools, or pay for the running of an entire hospital. Last year, additional expenses for a £300,000 wardrobe and a £60,000 well, both for Buckingham Palace were made to the tax payer. When people are forced to sleep on the streets, we cannot justify spending £95,000,000 on a relic that serves no purpose.

The monarchy encourages the continuation and acceptance of outdated traditions and beliefs. Apart from the image we project abroad of an outdated nation living in the past, it is a relic of an age which no person living in Britain should be proud of. Whilst Britain as a nation prospered and the monarchy lived a sheltered life of luxury, those who created the wealth, the working classes, were forced to live in unimaginable suffering. Abroad, Britain sold human beings into slavery, and treated inhabitants of her colonies as second-class citizens, causing the long term underdevelopment and tensions that we see today in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Is this really an institution we are expected to show loyalty to ?

The monarchy no longer commands the respect or support of the British people. The appalling behavior individuals within this institution renders it unfit to sit at the head of this country. The Duke of Edinburgh is a disgrace to the nation and a hypocrite. Only 12% of the public believe that the monarchy should continue in it's present form. Clearly, people have lost faith in the monarchy, and something needs to be done to correct this situation.

In conclusion, although the monarchy doesn’t physically have a role, it is it's symbolic features and what it represents that mean we have to abolish it. Unfortunately, certain individuals in Britain are stuck in a time warp of jingoism and isolationism. National boundaries have no relevance in the world, they only serve to prevent progress. There is enough food for everyone, but national boundaries mean that most of Africa starves. The monarchy and national pride is unproductive, and legitimizes (indirectly) racism. Our immediate future is as an integral part of the European Union. However, the monarchy is the last remaining relic to a past where Britain could stand alone, and the last remaining barrier to a future where we most definitely cannot. The monarchy, like slavery, sexual and class discrimination, and colonial exploitation is a throwback to our shameful past, and an impediment to our bright future.

Seeing Charles and Camilla just cements my resolve that we have evolved beyond their indulgence at taxpayer's expense.

It is ridiculous to treat these people so lavishly, for a job that provides no substantive survival value for anyone.

The British Royal Family is a menace to democracy and represents in its warped view of the world, a cavalier disregard for liberal values.

The Monarchy embodies the idea of a social hierarchy and encourages the island nation of Britain to look back instead of forward.
unmanned transport is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 04:04   #8 (permalink)
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: A Whilom nimble brain. With 31 million posts.
Age: 73
Posts: 3,375
So, start with the basic premise that the Queen owns everything. She passes a billion quid's worth of paintings going to breakfast, and she hasn't even left her digs. If she has breakfast in bed, her bacon and eggs pass a billion quids worth of paintings, before getting cold. You may think I'm exaggerating about the billion. But you'd be wrong.

She can dissolve parliament, and if it won't dissolve, she can set about them with her loyal forces until they wave a white flag from Westminster and ask nicely to be allowed to go home.

All other people can wave, curtsy, bow, and pay a proportion of their taxes, or leave. It's their choice. One other option is for them to rebel, mutiny, form groups of grumbling peasants before going home. But then, the Queen is the one person that can really demand to send the boys into your house, so best to go to someone else's home to hide.

I like the Queen. I like Phillip . . . I tend to say the same sort of things he does, though I have to say, I don't get the same attention.

I admit to being a tad jealous. Thinking of another thread this evening . . . when she goes to an hotel in America, they change the potty before she sits on it. Who's fourning now?
Loose rivets is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 05:43   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: On the ground for now.
Posts: 276
You can grow up to be anything you want in Canada, except Canada's head of state.

The monarchy: Keeping Canada's head of state foreign, white and Protesant. Canadians need not apply.

A sad state of affairs.
unmanned transport is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 06:31   #10 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vaucluse, Provence
Age: 61
Posts: 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by unmanned transport View Post
English monarchy
Wots that then? Us Jocks, Taffies and (Northern) Micks should be told.

Some in the Commonwealth are a bit too common, methinks
sitigeltfel is online now  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 06:55   #11 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Land of Beer and Chocolate
Age: 45
Posts: 761
Well, all I can say is that if the drivel that has been posted by unmanned transport is the typical "anti-royal family" viewpoint then you can guarantee support for the royal family for another 100 years.
hellsbrink is online now  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 07:08   #12 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 450
Indeed. If only it had been a sensible piece people may have given it more credence. As it is it's a load of drivel which doesn't do the anti monarchist view any favours at all.
Flap 5 is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 07:08   #13 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,681
hellsbrink - agreed.

If you want to oppose something, it's better to have your facts right, to argue coherently, logically and factually.

This article (and unmanned transport) do none of those things.

I can respect someone who wants to end the monarchy (heck, I'm married to one of 'em) if they argue their point with some degree of logic. But what is there to argue with an unintelligent, illogical, ill-informed rant?
Captain Stable is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 07:19   #14 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 46
Posts: 305
Quote:
The monarchy: Keeping Canada's head of state foreign, white and Protesant. Canadians need not apply.
Oh you poor things, you arn't the only ones.

Me I'm happy for O'L liz to be head of state, gives something for the little kiddies to come out and see on the odd occasion she visits us convicts. As for Charlie and Camilla, not sure on that, but hay you have to take the good with the Uuuummm boring might be it. On the other hand I can't wait for Queen Kate, now theres a Queen to look up to.
rh200 is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 07:32   #15 (permalink)
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: A Whilom nimble brain. With 31 million posts.
Age: 73
Posts: 3,375
Quote:
You can grow up to be anything you want in Canada, except Canada's head of state.

Canada? . . . Canada? Let me see, that's not in Texas is it?

Ah, I remember . . . just north a bit, and east of Sarah Palin. Now, there's a candidate for queen.

Google Image Result for http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/sarah-palin-feb-25-2.jpg


Thinks, given I'm about 50 millionth in line for the throne, if all those people were whisked away by aliens, is it possible I could be head of state where a Canadian couldn't be?
Loose rivets is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 07:33   #16 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, and Paris
Age: 56
Posts: 668
I have never been a great admirer of the institiution of Monarchy, however I would rather have the Queen as head of state than some member of the British professional politician class such as His Toneness (tony bliar).
DC10RealMan is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 07:36   #17 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: south of Cirencester, north of Lyneham
Age: 66
Posts: 1,169
There are definite advantages to separating Head of State and Head of Government. Looking at the elected presidents there are around (let alone the dictators such as Mugabe and others), the British royal family are a damn sight more honest and caring for the people than most. Additonally,they aren't siphoning off everything from internal taxes to received foreign aid into private Swiss bank accounts.

For Canada, New Zealand and Australia, for all practical matters, the Governor General takes the role of Head of State except when the Queen visits. The GG is appointed, but is chosen by the country, and is a native of the country.

Incidentally, if colonialism is so bad, why do the few colonies left want to stay that way? The answer is that they get advantages (mainly financial) from so doing!
radeng is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 07:36   #18 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sunny Sussex
Posts: 770
I'm saying nowt.
Parapunter is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 08:04   #19 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: due south
Posts: 1,329
It was appropriate that rh200 mentioned hay in his sentence about Charlie and Camilla, because they are both fond of riding horses.
henry crun is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2011, 08:06   #20 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up...
Posts: 1,185
Just watching the local news with Prince William in Far North Queensland (where he's getting a very good welcome, people have been looking forward to him coming).
All I can say is that if they don't get the poor bugger a hat, the problem may take care of itself. Walking around in the tropical sun without one is not conductive to good heath and happiness!
Worrals in the wilds is offline  
 
 
This ad will disappear if you login
Closed Thread
 


Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:42.


vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, or sciolists*, to elicit certain reactions.

*"sciolist"... Noun, archaic. "a person who pretends to be knowledgeable and well informed".