FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

Queens consent

Jump to newest
 

By *ealthy_and_Hung OP   Man
over a year ago

Princes Risborough, Luasanne, Alderney

it appears the head of the haus hapsberg cartel has been interfering in the political process and depriving people of democracy for at least the last 50 years in order to fatten her bank balance. who'd have thought?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ionelhutzMan
over a year ago

liverpool

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth

Gawd bless her.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

Think we should go for the non domiciles first. That would open a few eyes to the tax evasion in the U.K.

once the queen goes I’m all for a republic as the rest of them I don’t care for. Yes the Prince Charles trusts are very nice and Williams wife is very pretty but they tip the peak of an outdated class system which drags this country down constantly.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Nothing but corrupt scrounging bsdrds

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oldswarriorMan
over a year ago

Falkirk

Aye, they will be sitting in Buckingham Palace shitting themselves when they read this

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago

Bristol


"Aye, they will be sitting in Buckingham Palace shitting themselves when they read this "

I doubt it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *wisted999Man
over a year ago

North Bucks


"Aye, they will be sitting in Buckingham Palace shitting themselves when they read this "

I think they will be sitting there for a while longer yet as well.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ealthy_and_Hung OP   Man
over a year ago

Princes Risborough, Luasanne, Alderney

nothing will happen. it never does. on the whole, people seem to be happy with rules being applied that benefit just a handful of the population. however it's also fine to ask the rhetorical question of why would anybody be disgruntled that brexit has been moulded into something that makes sure the royal family increase their wealth instead of benefiting the country as whole.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercuryMan
over a year ago

Grantham


"Aye, they will be sitting in Buckingham Palace shitting themselves when they read this "

As tbis was from 1973, they probably won't even remember!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oldswarriorMan
over a year ago

Falkirk


"nothing will happen. it never does. on the whole, people seem to be happy with rules being applied that benefit just a handful of the population. however it's also fine to ask the rhetorical question of why would anybody be disgruntled that brexit has been moulded into something that makes sure the royal family increase their wealth instead of benefiting the country as whole."

Blame the majority of the UK. They voted for it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"nothing will happen. it never does. on the whole, people seem to be happy with rules being applied that benefit just a handful of the population. however it's also fine to ask the rhetorical question of why would anybody be disgruntled that brexit has been moulded into something that makes sure the royal family increase their wealth instead of benefiting the country as whole.

Blame the majority of the UK. They voted for it.

"

No no. It was a small minority

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oldswarriorMan
over a year ago

Falkirk


"nothing will happen. it never does. on the whole, people seem to be happy with rules being applied that benefit just a handful of the population. however it's also fine to ask the rhetorical question of why would anybody be disgruntled that brexit has been moulded into something that makes sure the royal family increase their wealth instead of benefiting the country as whole.

Blame the majority of the UK. They voted for it.

No no. It was a small minority"

So a small minority got the majority vote

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ealthy_and_Hung OP   Man
over a year ago

Princes Risborough, Luasanne, Alderney

considering that the queen lobbied the government to alter policy on the replacement of farm subsidies after brexit it would seem that those who are attempting to limit the occurance to have only happened in 1973 are extremely poorly briefed

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oldswarriorMan
over a year ago

Falkirk


"considering that the queen lobbied the government to alter policy on the replacement of farm subsidies after brexit it would seem that those who are attempting to limit the occurance to have only happened in 1973 are extremely poorly briefed"

Ah thank you for explaining the connection.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"nothing will happen. it never does. on the whole, people seem to be happy with rules being applied that benefit just a handful of the population. however it's also fine to ask the rhetorical question of why would anybody be disgruntled that brexit has been moulded into something that makes sure the royal family increase their wealth instead of benefiting the country as whole.

Blame the majority of the UK. They voted for it.

No no. It was a small minority

So a small minority got the majority vote

"

That's what I'm frequently told by Remainers

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ealthy_and_Hung OP   Man
over a year ago

Princes Risborough, Luasanne, Alderney

now it also appears that legislation was altered in order for the monarch to take advantage of £9 billion profit from the leasing of the seabed around the coast to renewable energy generation.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andy 1Couple
over a year ago

northeast


"now it also appears that legislation was altered in order for the monarch to take advantage of £9 billion profit from the leasing of the seabed around the coast to renewable energy generation."
it says wealthy and hung hope the rope wasnt to tight

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercuryMan
over a year ago

Grantham


"considering that the queen lobbied the government to alter policy on the replacement of farm subsidies after brexit it would seem that those who are attempting to limit the occurance to have only happened in 1973 are extremely poorly briefed"

Really? Have you proof of any of your claims? Care to share?

Your claim on seabed rights go back to 2004. Again, your proof that the Queen personally lobbied on this legislation?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rystal DreamtimeTV/TS
over a year ago

horsham

Orf with their heads !!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ionelhutzMan
over a year ago

liverpool

Pr machine on full effect

Expect too see a report of them starting a new charity on the next few days.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ealthy_and_Hung OP   Man
over a year ago

Princes Risborough, Luasanne, Alderney

it seems that there is record of a thousand instances so far, where the royals denied democracy to the nation and interfered in legislation to benefit their commercial enterprises.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ionelhutzMan
over a year ago

liverpool

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/09/prince-charles-vetted-laws-that-stop-his-tenants-buying-their-homes

The guardian really going for them

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top