King Charles DID NOT appoint Prince Andrew “Deputy King”

Page 1 of 1 [ 9 posts ] 

AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,580
Location: Houston, Texas

18 Sep 2022, 11:37 pm

https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-pri ... 2854?amp=1

Quote:
“ . . The line of succession is the formal order in which blood members of the royal family stand to inherit the throne. This order also dictates who the Counsellors of State are.

“This is a group of five of the most senior members of the royal family, including the spouse of the sovereign and their four heirs who are over the age of 21, who are able to be called upon to deputize for a number of the monarch's official duties. . ”

“ . . Therefore, a sovereign does not and cannot appoint the Counsellors of State, this is an entitlement of birth, rather than a new "appointment" as some posts have stipulated. . ”

* Emphasis added

Sometimes it’s important to work the debunk side of the equation. In today’s modern world, it’s often important to work the debunk side.

And, of course I take issues of sexual abuse seriously.



Matrix Glitch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2021
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,741
Location: US

18 Sep 2022, 11:56 pm

"Deputy King" LOL

The Prince of Wales would fill such a role if there was one.

It's all Charles and William now. Andrew is chopped liver. Always has been.



AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,580
Location: Houston, Texas

19 Sep 2022, 12:19 am

Matrix Glitch wrote:
"Deputy King" LOL

The Prince of Wales would fill such a role if there was one.

It's all Charles and William now. Andrew is chopped liver. Always has been.

But rumors of such raced around the Internet. It was truly an example of the Mark Twain quote— A good lie can get halfway around the world before the truth can even get its boots on. But the truth kind of has a way of catching up. [or words to this effect]



AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,580
Location: Houston, Texas

19 Sep 2022, 12:25 am

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... te-funeral
Monday, Sept. 12, 2022

Quote:
“ . . Only during the final vigil at Queen Elizabeth II’s coffin in Westminster Hall will Prince Andrew, 62, be permitted to wear uniform, a dispensation granted as a special mark of respect for Her Majesty the Queen.

“It is proof, if it were needed, that nothing much will probably change for Andrew now his brother Charles is King. He remains stripped of his military patronages and use of the HRH title. . ”

Yes, Andrew was friends with Jeffrey Epstein. And most likely, Andrew had sex with at least one underage teenage girl.

He remains disgraced.



beady
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Sep 2013
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 813

19 Sep 2022, 12:47 am

I’m not a citizen of the uk so my opinion is only my two cents but..

Wouldn’t it be a great idea to retire the whole royal family, give the existing members a good enough pension and distribute the land holdings and etc etc to a more worthy cause - like the poor and hungry?
Have we not all figured out that royal blood is no different than any other? Or does that whole situation make more money for the citizens than it costs them? Or perhaps it’s a pride thing.

No offense intended. And it’s not just UK -I think there needs to be a serious redistribution of wealth around the world including the USA. Nobody should be a billionaire because profits should be limited, shared, and given away if excessive. Just a dream I know.



Matrix Glitch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2021
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,741
Location: US

19 Sep 2022, 2:02 am

This whole deal with the Queen is bringing in billions of tourist dollars. That's the reason to keep the whole royal bit going in my opinion. It's a major tourist attraction even under normal conditions. Charles' coronation will be another enormous money maker next year.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,557

19 Sep 2022, 6:05 am

AardvarkGoodSwimmer wrote:
Yes, Andrew was friends with Jeffrey Epstein. And most likely, Andrew had sex with at least one underage teenage girl.

He remains disgraced.


As with cockroaches you see one it means theres plenty under the rafters. Andrew has plenty of other things hiding in the closet.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,557

19 Sep 2022, 6:06 am

Matrix Glitch wrote:
This whole deal with the Queen is bringing in billions of tourist dollars. That's the reason to keep the whole royal bit going in my opinion. It's a major tourist attraction even under normal conditions. Charles' coronation will be another enormous money maker next year.


Actually agree with this. The Thai and Japanese royal family are equally a big drawcard for tourism dollars but nowhere near on the scale of HRH Elizabeth II, Charles has big shoes to fill.



AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,580
Location: Houston, Texas

20 Sep 2022, 12:04 pm

beady wrote:
. . . And it’s not just UK -I think there needs to be a serious redistribution of wealth around the world including the USA. Nobody should be a billionaire because profits should be limited, shared, and given away if excessive. Just a dream I know.

I’d urge you to consider mixed economies. For example, I used to think Sweden was really the way forward. These days I’m liking the “Asian Tiger” mixed economies such as Japan [old school from the 1980s], South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong [now, sadly :( ,in process of being taken over politically by China] as a good way of achieving both social spending and long-term growth. There are even the “Tiger Cub” economies, such as the following:

Image


https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-econo ... mic-growth

And whereas we in the West might criticize globalization, it has lifted a heck of a lot of people out of poverty, almost certainly in China itself more than anywhere else.

These mixed economies have a fair amount of central planning. And giving a rough number, I’d say they’re 75% capitalist and 25% socialist.