Page 4 | Anti Monarchy Protects

JuliesBicycle · 2023-03-14T12:54:41+00:00

The anti-monarchy protests seem to be increasing. They are appearing regularly at events Charles attends. This one happened only yesterday. https://twitter.com/i/status/1635304322052534274 The protests are still too small to make any major difference, but they are slowly growing. And importantly Elizabeth did not face these types of protests. I wonder if they will continue to grow.

BadgerB · 14/03/2023 18:41

PillBoxes · Today 18:37
the UK could ensure that the incumbent has no political power and must keep his/her trap shut in relation to controversial or political events. The only function would be to cut ribbons, wear nice clothes, speak proper, and give a good impression of the country s/he represents. That AND scrutiny of legislation before it is passed, any doubts, off it goes to the courts to decide.

I think you've just described a constitutional monarchy...

OchonAgusOchonOh · 14/03/2023 18:43

LittleFingerStrength · 14/03/2023 14:41

I am sure I saw that the Irish president - like some odd men in the Irish administrative roles is all for teaching small children some very odd sex education, much like the American presidential representative. They seem to go for much broader and younger targets than Andrew.

Show quote history

It's not terribly odd. They are trying to add in a bit about gender identity. Most of the RSE stuff is very mainstream Lots of groups opposing it, particularly the fact they are claiming we all have a gender identity but I read through the curriculum and, other than that, it's mainly pretty innocuous and age appropriate.

The president made a statement about the importance of teaching inclusivity. He shouldn't have, as his role is meant to be non-political. However, I seem to recall king charles making various statements that could be deemed political too at various stages

Roussette · 14/03/2023 18:44

Serenster · 14/03/2023 18:41

That’s a bribe you’re alleging there, though. Not money laundering. Completely different.

(They will have gone through all their anti- bribery checks though too)

I'd love to know about their 'anti bribery checks' !!

We do however know about the rubber Fawcett who bounces back.

MarshaMelrose · 14/03/2023 18:44

Agreed.
And Andrew refused to be interviewed by the US. They asked the UK government to intervene and they refused.
Of course they are above the law. Do not treat us like idiots.

Andrew is subject to the law. No one offers to be voluntarily interviewed by a police body. That's madness. It's very stressful.and you're likely to say things wrong or that can be twisted. No lawyer would advise their client to be interviewed voluntarily.

Andrew offered to tell them what he knew. His lawyers asked the FBI to send their questions and they'd reply in writing. The FBI declined that offer. That's up to the FBI.

Andrew has just been sued. Clearly he isn't above the law. But if he's going to be pursued for criminal activities, he's entitled to due process.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 14/03/2023 18:44

As it is Charles like Andrew is above the law

Not quite, JuliesBicycle. Charles literally is above the law since the monarch can't be sued, but Andrew or any of the others could be, at least in theory

If the FBI had wanted Andrew to be interviewed in the UK that could have been easily arranged

Not sure about that one, Serenster. I don't dispute that they could easily have made the request and got the FBI over here, but just how high would you put the chances of them ever being allowed access to him?

Original poster

JuliesBicycle · 14/03/2023 18:44

Serenster · 14/03/2023 18:30

The UK government doesn’t need to assist US law enforcement agencies because they already have Mutual Assistance in place with UK law enforcement agencies. They are well-used on both sides. If the FBI had wanted Andrew to be interviewed in the UK that could have been easily arranged. They could have flown agents over to attend as well (the agents can’t wear their guns though - from experience I know they don’t like that!). But they didn’t.

It does not aoply to the royals.

OP posts:

Serenster · 14/03/2023 18:45

Yes, it does.

Roussette · 14/03/2023 18:46

I don't dispute that they could easily have made the request and got the FBI over here, but just how high would you put the chances of them ever being allowed access to him?

Exactly. Let's not forget how he was dodging being served papers by up and down from Windsor to Balmoral.

Original poster

JuliesBicycle · 14/03/2023 18:46

@MarshaMelrose Would I be allowed to be sent written questions and reply in writing if the police wanted to talk to me? Of course not. No wonder the FBI said no.

OP posts:

Serenster · 14/03/2023 18:47

(I mean, knowing Andrew, he’d have doubtless tried to argue diplomatic immunity, as a former trade envoy etc 🤣. But absolutely he can be compelled to attend an interview. There is no applicable exemption. Princess Anne has some convictions)

Original poster

JuliesBicycle · 14/03/2023 18:47

Roussette · 14/03/2023 18:44

I'd love to know about their 'anti bribery checks' !!

We do however know about the rubber Fawcett who bounces back.

Show quote history

Anti bribery checks will just be charles sating it is not a bribe.

OP posts:

Serenster · 14/03/2023 18:48

JuliesBicycle · 14/03/2023 18:46

@MarshaMelrose Would I be allowed to be sent written questions and reply in writing if the police wanted to talk to me? Of course not. No wonder the FBI said no.

This happens a lot, in the real world.

(So many people with such firm views about things they know nothing about!)

Original poster

JuliesBicycle · 14/03/2023 18:48

If it was anyone else, Annes dog would have been put down. She got off very lightly.

OP posts:

Roussette · 14/03/2023 18:49

Serenster · 14/03/2023 18:48

This happens a lot, in the real world.

(So many people with such firm views about things they know nothing about!)

Show quote history

And you know everything about?!

PillBoxes · 14/03/2023 18:49

BadgerB · 14/03/2023 18:41

PillBoxes · Today 18:37
the UK could ensure that the incumbent has no political power and must keep his/her trap shut in relation to controversial or political events. The only function would be to cut ribbons, wear nice clothes, speak proper, and give a good impression of the country s/he represents. That AND scrutiny of legislation before it is passed, any doubts, off it goes to the courts to decide.

I think you've just described a constitutional monarchy...

A constitutional monarch is not elected by the people though and never will be. That is the issue I think. A bit of a democratic gap there.

Serenster · 14/03/2023 18:49

On this topic, yes, I do!

MarshaMelrose · 14/03/2023 18:50

PillBoxes · 14/03/2023 18:37

There is an awful lot of derision being applied to an elected Head of State. That must be from looking at the abysmal politicians out there at present, and no one is denying that.

However..... as in other civilised countries who have a titular HOS, the UK could ensure that the incumbent has no political power and must keep his/her trap shut in relation to controversial or political events. The only function would be to cut ribbons, wear nice clothes, speak proper, and give a good impression of the country s/he represents. That AND scrutiny of legislation before it is passed, any doubts, off it goes to the courts to decide.

Many people think that the only HOS available to UK in the event of a Republic is someone who actually has political power like POTUS and to a lesser extent Prez of France. Not true at all, look at Ireland for example and although Higgins is a motormouth he has no power to change anything.

I don't think people automatically think the system would be like France with two tiers of government - president and prime minister. I think most people think a president would do what the king does but on a smaller scale. They'd probably be a dull person, not known out of the country, and elected every few years at great financial cost. I guess it's up to the public which they'd prefer.

HedwigIsMyDemon · 14/03/2023 18:51

@BadgerB we need to elect our head of state not have them foisted on us.

MarshaMelrose · 14/03/2023 18:54

Charles literally is above the law since the monarch can't be sued, but Andrew or any of the others could be, at least in theory.

Not in theory. Andrew has actually just been sued.

Nimbostratus100 · 14/03/2023 18:55

GrimDamnFanjo · 14/03/2023 14:44

It's unlikely to ever happen.
Potentially there could be some scaling back of the state related work but I can't see any gov ever putting forward republican legislation.

No, because the government relies heavily on the power of the monarchy, which the monarch themselves don't exercise, but delegate to the PM.

Charles hasn't done anything wrong, but the system itself is hated, and many people, hating the whole system we have of royalty, didn't express their views in the past out of respect for the actual queen.

But the time has come to end this farce now. Charles should not be coronated. If he had any sense, he would be able to see that himself.

MarshaMelrose · 14/03/2023 18:57

JuliesBicycle · 14/03/2023 18:46

@MarshaMelrose Would I be allowed to be sent written questions and reply in writing if the police wanted to talk to me? Of course not. No wonder the FBI said no.

I'd advise you not to talk to them at all. Seriously, when police bodies are collecting evidence, they are not your friends. Keep schtum until your solicitor tells you otherwise.
The FBI had other reasons for saying no.

BadgerB · 14/03/2023 18:57

HedwigIsMyDemon · Today 18:51
we need to elect our head of state not have them foisted on us.
If s/he has no power, is just a figurehead, it really doesn't matter. Maybe "better the devil you know"?
Problem is it seems people want out HOS to be "better" than us poor mortals. A lot to ask

MarshaMelrose · 14/03/2023 19:01

But the time has come to end this farce now. Charles should not be coronated.

And yet, May 6th 👑 🥳

Puzzledandpissedoff · 14/03/2023 19:04

I'd love to know about their 'anti bribery checks' !!

You took the words out of my mouth, Roussette. On the one hand we have a guy from a culture where bribery is normalised to the point of being almost expected, and on the other a man now above the law ... so good luck to anyone hoping to investigate under those circumstances

Not in theory. Andrew has actually just been sued

You're absolutely right, Marsha; that was a mistake and what I should have written was "properly investigated"
I believe the idea of anyone "compelling" Andrew is effectively a theory though; certainly the principle exists in law, but as said, just how high are the chances that he'd have actually been compelled?

Roussette · 14/03/2023 19:06

I wish it was just May 6th. It isn't.

It's endless news items about all sorts to do with it... and it's going to build up and difficult to avoid. We've had the carriage, the special oil, the music, who is playing the concert, who isn't playing, crowns and who's wearing what, on and on.