Jump to content

diamond jubbilee


greenman
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Satisfy my curiousity. Are you all on a paid holiday today or at least received a day in lieu? Two companies on SVT, Serco and Sodexo, have decided that patriotic fervour was going a bit too far when it came to giving their staff a holiday. Are there any other companies out there who have put up a bit of bunting, maybe even attended the "garden party" but failed to distribute any largesse amongst their workers? Would be interesting to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hideki Tojo Japan

The number of dead: 4 million

...

Hirohito Japan

The death toll: 6 million

I can't help wondering how Tojo and Hirohito are both listed in your list, but with different values. Why do you believe the Emperor was culpable for two million more than Tojo?

 

Hirohito was Emperor from 1925 to 1989 - therefore his reign included the Japanese invasions of Manchuria in 1931 and the rest of China in 1937.

 

Tojo was PM of Japan from 1941 until his forced resignation in 1944. Although he had earlier been a general and the Japanese Army Minister from 1940 to 1941.

 

Yes indeed. The bit I find curious about the list is having them both listed, as (presumably) the Tojo deaths would be included within the Emperor's tally.

 

I found they were listed separately on the same page of bad world leaders

Therefore, I included them as such

My Point was, watch out for what you wish for.

It may cost more than just money.

And just because we voted for it. It does not automatically make it good.

At least the Queen as head of state has no political party agenda

She has done the job very well under the circumstances 12 party imbeciles

At number 10 Downing Street

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Para Handy - You are using the wrong name- perhaps you should sign in with Attilla the Hun. The Captain Macfarlane in Neill Munro's wonderfull stories would be far more gentle and subtle with his arguments.

Your theme is basically that there have been dictators in history but we were lucky because we gave an unelected young lady the throne in 1952 because her qualifications and experience were:

1. Her uncle gave up the throne to her dad

2. Her dad died

Are you reallly saying that there is nobody in Britain with the decent qualities to make an honourary position of President? Does this then mean that her Majesty's rule has left Britain in a terrible,immoral and decadent condition?

To my recolection Mary Robinson was no dictator and was president of Ireland and highly regarded internationally.

Still if we prefer to persist with medieval ways in the space age, then so be it. Here's a toast to the king - over the water !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Lucky Jack........Sir Oswald Mosely (now there was a real twisted bistardo for you, but he would have made a very nice Dictator I'm sure, but was kicked off to jail instead)....

Mary Robinson...she did alright, but why is Ireland now so broke as a Country, that it'll take a full generation to recover.....

Next!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Para Handy - You are using the wrong name- perhaps you should sign in with Attilla the Hun. The Captain Macfarlane in Neill Munro's wonderfull stories would be far more gentle and subtle with his arguments.

Your theme is basically that there have been dictators in history but we were lucky because we gave an unelected young lady the throne in 1952 because her qualifications and experience were:

1. Her uncle gave up the throne to her dad

2. Her dad died

Are you reallly saying that there is nobody in Britain with the decent qualities to make an honourary position of President? Does this then mean that her Majesty's rule has left Britain in a terrible,immoral and decadent condition?

To my recolection Mary Robinson was no dictator and was president of Ireland and highly regarded internationally.

Still if we prefer to persist with medieval ways in the space age, then so be it. Here's a toast to the king - over the water !

 

Well so much for Ireland who now they can vote for a ex member of the IRA.

A group that tried to blow up your precious parliament

But there again like Guy Fawkes & Co the IRA were only the second bunch try and get to parliament with honest entrenching’s. IE just to blowing the lot up

I have not seen anything yet (Past or Present) that suggests a decent precedent exists

And I am not a royalist but a realist we may have a weird system but it works

A Precedent will cost a lot more money while if you think our council expenses are high just wait until Precedent Millyband and his pals gets going.

 

And I have never said I was anything like Para Handy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well so much for Ireland who now they can vote for a ex member of the IRA.

A group that tried to blow up your precious parliament

But there again like Guy Fawkes & Co the IRA were only the second bunch try and get to parliament with honest entrenching’s. IE just to blowing the lot up

 

 

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. There have been quite a few heads of state who "helped" remove colonialist regimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Para Handy - You are using the wrong name- perhaps you should sign in with Attilla the Hun. The Captain Macfarlane in Neill Munro's wonderfull stories would be far more gentle and subtle with his arguments.

Your theme is basically that there have been dictators in history but we were lucky because we gave an unelected young lady the throne in 1952 because her qualifications and experience were:

1. Her uncle gave up the throne to her dad

2. Her dad died

Are you reallly saying that there is nobody in Britain with the decent qualities to make an honourary position of President? Does this then mean that her Majesty's rule has left Britain in a terrible,immoral and decadent condition?

To my recolection Mary Robinson was no dictator and was president of Ireland and highly regarded internationally.

Still if we prefer to persist with medieval ways in the space age, then so be it. Here's a toast to the king - over the water !

 

The Monarch represents the embodiment of State and serves to remind Parliament and Government that the State is impartial and that 'they' answer to 'it' - not the other way round.

 

It may be a quaint old system, but it works. Much better than having some psuedo-MP Government favourite wheeled in or, God forbid, some vacuous TV 'celebrity' voted in by the Great Unwashed as an El Presidente.

 

And if anyone can find any 'president' that rakes in as much cash from tourism for its countries - then I'll eat my copy of Hobbes 'Leviathan'....

 

Name half a dozen currently serving presidents without looking them up, go on :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used Mary Robinson as an example of a president who was well regarded in Ireland and abroad. Para Handy suddenly launches into a diatribe about the IRA and Guy fawkes but I am unaware if Mrs.Robinson approved of either cause. Neither was she responsible for Ireland's present economic problems and I don't think that her presidential position was overly expensive compared to royalty.

Scorrie quaintly asked me to name half a dozen current presidents without looking them up - I can't because I would have to seperate the political leaders from the honorary position of president I am arguing for. On the the same level I could ask you about the crowned heads of Europe but I would much rather ask people why they think that no one in Britain from inside or outside political life could be elected by some format as as Honourary President. After almost 100 years of the right to vote for all adults, why do we still adhere to something set up over 300 years ago with the Union of the Crowns.

I have no personal quarrel with Queen Elizabeth the first of Great Britain but I think that the job is out dated. As for the argument about tourism revenue, I guess Majesty World could be marketed like Disney World and give the tourists access to Buck House to boost the revenue with out tenants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used Mary Robinson as an example of a president who was well regarded in Ireland and abroad. Para Handy suddenly launches into a diatribe about the IRA and Guy fawkes but I am unaware if Mrs.Robinson approved of either cause. Neither was she responsible for Ireland's present economic problems and I don't think that her presidential position was overly expensive compared to royalty.

Scorrie quaintly asked me to name half a dozen current presidents without looking them up - I can't because I would have to seperate the political leaders from the honorary position of president I am arguing for. On the the same level I could ask you about the crowned heads of Europe but I would much rather ask people why they think that no one in Britain from inside or outside political life could be elected by some format as as Honourary President. After almost 100 years of the right to vote for all adults, why do we still adhere to something set up over 300 years ago with the Union of the Crowns.

I have no personal quarrel with Queen Elizabeth the first of Great Britain but I think that the job is out dated. As for the argument about tourism revenue, I guess Majesty World could be marketed like Disney World and give the tourists access to Buck House to boost the revenue with out tenants.

 

(Sensible head on)

 

Regarding tourism revenue, the attraction is that the Monarch still exists, otherwise it would be just another collection of stately homes and castles - every country in Europe has a collection of those. Many (such as Versailles) outstrip anything we have in the UK, yet it is the UK that remains the top destination for people interested in monarchy and grand history. Simply turning out a stale Mickey Duck World venue wouldn't be any good. And if my memory serves me correctly, the revenue brought in by said tourism far outweighs any expenditure made.

 

As for Presidency, my stand by my comments in my previous post. Also bear in mind that the Armed Forces do not swear allegiance to the Government - they swear allegiance to the Monarch. In other words they are servants of the Crown as the embodiment of the people.

 

The Monarch can also act as a bridge between the UK and countries that may potentially be politically or idealogically opposed to us, something that only a position totally removed from the UK's government stance can do. A 'president' is always seen as being a tool of the incumbent Government.

 

Your comment regarding '300 years' and the Act of Union is somewhat amiss. We've had a monarch for a lot longer than that.......nitpicking, I know.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...