Prince Charles does not want to hand over a TOTALLY POISONED CHALICE to his Grandchildren

Watch the Vid & then tell us if you think this man is lying!

Maybe he's heard of the Resource Based Economy & concluded that all of the other Capitalist alternatives are a F Joke.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

youtu.be...

linky no workie

reply to post by UKMinarchist


Prince Charles consumes more resources than 100 average British citizens. He's a hypocrite of the first order.

Prince Charles has always been an environmentalist as he's from a long term powerful family and if he wants that power to go on then there needs to be limits on the use of resources, as its better to have a dynasty that last 5000 years than one that gets destroyed after 50 due to everyone died as there was no food due to over production etc

Originally posted by SirMike
reply to post by UKMinarchist

 

Prince Charles consumes more resources than 100 average British citizens. He's a hypocrite of the first order.

You consume more resources than 100 third world humans, your a hypocrite of the first order.

reply to post by UKMinarchist

royal family is responsible very much that we have some of the third world countries...

LOL the Screaming Lefties in the Comments Section are having palputations

I prefer the rare defence to such flagrant bigotry


rogerhicks Yesterday 01:20 PM Bloofus, Prince Charles has, I believe, seen more of the world and deeper into it than you have. It is indeed dysfunctional, and quite unsustainable. His concerns are well founded. Clearly, Prince Charles has his own blind spots, as we all do, but his long-standing concern for the environment and the unsustainable impact human activity is having on it, shows me that he has far more sense than all our elected politicians - which is quite ironic, when you think about it: that an unelected heir to the throne should be so much wiser and understanding of society's collective long-term self-interesrts than its democratically elected representatives. It suggest to me that our so-democracy is deeply flawed. And what a pity that Prince Charles's wisdom and concerns are so little appreciated.

Its about message. If a very famous and influential person drives a car running on baby seals and coal, so be it..the person's words and ability to rally more than compensates for it.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Its about message. If a very famous and influential person drives a car running on baby seals and coal, so be it..the person's words and ability to rally more than compensates for it.

Agreed, Although I'm sure he run his car on baby seals lol, he did however have private meetings with six British .Gov Cabinet Ministers last year I believe (More than usual)

The British Royal family gets a lot of bashing, mainly from the Liberal Sector in society. But I will tell you one thing for nothing, I'd trust the Queen to run this country single handedly over any of the elected clowns we currently have in power or any of those that wish to be elected into power. By the very nature of power lust that the average government role attracts, we always end up with power hungry school boys to elect and nobody that really cares about the people. I no longer vote, it is a waste of time, I wouldn't trust any of them.

Originally posted by ZakOlongapo
reply to post by UKMinarchist

 

royal family is responsible very much that we have some of the third world countries...

On this Planet there are Third World Countries Yes, maybe your Country of ancestral Origin would have been a First World Country at some point in History Mr Olongapo, Maybe it would be one today if it wasn't for the British Royal Family, who knows, who cares, that was then.

Lets talk about what we are leaving our GrandChildren

reply to post by UKMinarchist


There is some merit to this comment, but thinking that the royal family care about their citizens or the planet is bordering delusional. They are as corrupt and despicable as all the other elites.

Only a member of an unelected ruling family who might rise to the throne can afford to take the long view. Unfortunately our political and economic system breeds short-termism.

Having a royal family is barbaric, and they aren't harmless buffoons either. It's time we had a constitutional republic, a treasury issuing money, corporations taxed as much as people, proportional voting, full time MPs who cant moonlight elsewhere, and a decent summer! Rant over.

reply to post by merkins


The monarchy brings in more money than it costs so its good basic economics as people want to see the pomp and pageantry that comes with our long history and if we didn't provide them with an opportunity to take a few photo's and walk around Liz's unwanted areas of the palace then I'm sure somewhere else would try and fill the void

and we can thank the American's with their Disney princess love for probably half the money as what little girl doesn't want to be a princess in her own palace?

reply to post by merkins


They are a constitutional monarchy, they have no say in matters regarding goverance. They are still here because they are part of our rich heritedge and 20 pence a year per person is a small price to pay to uphold our heritedge thank you very much.

Those Bozos own a large chunk of the worlds problems.....
They deserve every kick in tha pants they get and more....
The LAST thing the world needs is MORE ROYALTY.....
They got your guns and your self respect and now you protest you LIKE it that way..?
everyone should be like youse guys......?
Good luck with that..................

reply to post by UKMinarchist


... i am originally from middle of europe, now living in UK. but i did live few years in asia and africa.
most of the resources from third world are sold in London.... no need big brain to find out who profits till today...
they dont care about human childrens future, royals are reptilians BP and geoengineering (few examples) do not care about clean planet... he is liar, end of story.

reply to post by ZakOlongapo


Dear oh dear. Please look up Constitutional Monarchy on Wikipedia and come back with a straight face and blame that on the Monarchy. The Monarchy holds no power.

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by ZakOlongapo

 

Dear oh dear. Please look up Constitutional Monarchy on Wikipedia and come back with a straight face and blame that on the Monarchy. The Monarchy holds no power.

you mean the billions in the windsor's bank accounts
don't mean squat?



lol

reply to post by Maxatoria


If we got rid of them tourism woud actally rise as people will come to gawp at all the state owned palaces and to see the queens old bedroom.

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by merkins

 

They are a constitutional monarchy, they have no say in matters regarding goverance. They are still here because they are part of our rich heritedge and 20 pence a year per person is a small price to pay to uphold our heritedge thank you very much.

Our heritage wouldn't change if the royals were kicked out. There's a kind of stockholm syndrome between the British people and the royals, its really sad and embarassing.

The Royal family have a very strong say in matters regarding governance, we just don't get told about it, and they generally don't use that power at the moment at least not visibly.

The queen has the power to control the houses of parliament and to kick out a government.

Prince Charles has the right to veto any tax legislation that could adverely affect his income or assets. Everytime such a tax issue arises the government has to get charles' permission for the legislation.

Additionally the queens recent cabinet meeting visit now sets a precedent to allow her or more likely the person after her to meddle in the daily runnng of the government.

A few years ago the queen tried to scam the public for thousands of pounds for heating her palaces with money in the hardship fund that was set aside for heating for poor pensioners. She actually had the gall to apply for the hardship fund!

The queen was also responsible for children from an orphanage in canada going missing in the mid 60s.

History is littered with rulers that used human sacrifice. The only difference nowadays is that this practice is no longer seen as acceptable. It doesn't mean they've stopped these practices but instead that they now do it behind closed doors.