Death of Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh at 99 years of age.

dennis

Jedi
Its interesting that all the Trump Russia gate business revolved around clandestine doings in Washington, London and Rome. The three city states within countries. Remember Hillary et al and their purple dresses and scarfs? The absolute dumping of the veneer of "democracy" and rule of law to get him out of office. Catalyst indeed, he ripped off their masks and flushed them out in the open. Then we get Corona (crown) virus, and the Biden MasterCard puppet show.

The times they are a changing, but its been going on over and over again since way back.
 
Because many do believe that, and much worse. If you are not precise in your criticism you leave others guessing.
Its just that they were and probably still are associated with numerous pedophiles in the past which sets off alarm bells if you like. And people, decent people have been silenced for talking about it. Do you use that archaic sense of intuition in your life.?
 

bjorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Its just that they were and probably still are associated with numerous pedophiles in the past which sets off alarm bells if you like. And people, decent people have been silenced for talking about it.

We've already gone over this in this thread.

Do you use that archaic sense of intuition in your life.?

Don't forget critical thinking.
 

A Jay

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I am astounded at the people on here who seem to be 'Royalists'.

Are you using the term royalist in the sense that a royalist is a person who supports a monarchic government? No one here has said they support such a system. In fact, quite the opposite.

Are you using the term in the sense that a royalist is a person who supports the British royal family? Well, that depends on what you mean by support. If by support you mean that they're worth keeping as an institution for Britain, then again you're mistaken as no one thinks that they should be kept. If by support you mean that individual royal family members should have our condolences for the loss of their loved one, then you would be correct.

These people are parasites. There is no other word for them.

Yes there is and it's called victims. Read Laura's posts again and pay particular attention to the parts where she describes that these people are being manipulated and controlled.

An archaic institution that is corrupt to the core.

Archaic institution, sure. Corrupt to the core, debatable. You really should direct this anger, disgust, and hatred where it belongs and that is at the technocrats and bureaucrats running the MIC. They are the ones killing babies. Not the Queen or her family.

Like all the western governments of the world they are complicit in hoarding wealth and using a system to keep people in fear and poverty.

They have more than figurative guns to their heads. What do you expect them to do? Keep in mind that they're just people, who didn't chose their positions might I add, and you shouldn't expect more from them than you're average person.

The common people are their plaything.

Please give an authoritative example where the Queen treated someone cruelly and/or displayed an open contempt for common people. If you have such a strong conviction that the Queen is one of the most horrid of people, then surely it's based on specific examples. If you cannot find specific examples, then perhaps your belief is based on a lie that was spread by the REAL PTB in order to get your anger directed at someone other than them.

Yes the institution is archaic, yes they help give legitimacy to an exploitative system, but in spite of this we can still have some sympathy for the life they have to live which is a hard one and wasn't one that they freely chose.

They lack everything that a human being should be. Quite frankly it's sickening.

The Queen has far more of what makes a decent human being than you likely ever will. Unless you can get down off your morally outraged high horse and realize you'd likely be no better, probably worse, than them in their position. Just look at how vicious you are at attacking this family who've done nothing to you and really have no say in anything.

Its just that they were and probably still are associated with numerous pedophiles in the past which sets off alarm bells if you like. And people, decent people have been silenced for talking about it.

You seem determined to think the absolute worst of these people and here your justification is guilt by association.

I've been associated with all sorts of terrible people during the course of my short life. Sometimes I can't say something about it because of factors beyond my control. I'm sure the same is true of you. Ever stop to think that maybe that's true of them too?

Just as an interesting side note about your thinking. You're holding them to a higher standard than you would a normal person. Thereby assuming they should be held to a higher standard. Which means that in your mind they are above normal people. This is exactly how they got to be in their positions as royals. By having people think they are above normal people. So your reason for not viewing them as royalty is the reason they're considered royalty. Which makes your position a sort of performative contradiction. Funny, no?
 

ScioAgapeOmnis

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I think democracies are actually scarier than monarchies. Just look at who rules democracies, who are the presidents and prime ministers, and then compare against the royals. “Elected” leaders seem to be doing all the death and destruction in the world, but the royals seem to mostly just mind their own business yet they get all the hate? Just look at the Queen and her golden piano, how terrible and selfish! Let’s ignore that our humble democratic politicians have been killing millions. But hey they don’t have a golden piano, so it’s fine.

If your line of succession comes from within a family, it seems unlikely that psychopaths can show up. Sometimes sure, but psychopaths are rare in the population and have to be chosen from a large pool of candidates, kind of like resumes for a job position. If you only have 3 resumes because they come from within the same family each generation, how likely are they to be psychopaths?

So what do the psychopaths who are lusting for power going to do? They can’t exactly infiltrate the royal family - they aren’t taking outside applications. Democracies on the other hand are ripe for takeover - the “candidates” can be hand selected and heavily promoted by the military industrial complex media machine. What did anyone know about Obama before he showed up out of nowhere into power? How is this a less risky system than a monarchy? If there are any real royals around, unless they’re all somehow psychopathic and incredibly power hungry themselves, which seems highly unlikely to persist over generations within one family, they have to become useful idiots for someone else.

Psychopaths, to retain power over time, must accomplish a few key things. “Anyone” should be a potential candidate for positions of power - they need maximum number of resumes to choose from for the job position to ensure those resumes will contain psychopathic ones. Which means the resumes cannot come from a single family or a small village or limited genetic pool that you cannot invade or manipulate from the outside. Which seems to preclude monarchies. This creates a problem. People love their monarch families as long as they’re good to their subjects. Families are awesome and very human and everyone has one, so it is super relatable and can work really well. People don’t like an arbitrary monarch selected at random for no reason. If you’re not gonna have a royal family, you must have a representative democracy, so people can have faith in something - you need a buy-in one way or another. But you obviously cannot have an actual representative democracy. So a royal family OR a democracy have to both be just a powerless front, or else you (being the psychopaths) are royally screwed. In Britain you have both! But in reality - neither. However, a puppet like Boris Johnson is much more likely to be a psychopath than the Queen, just statistically speaking - given that he was hand-selected by other psychopaths for being a good puppet, and she was part of the right family, and so not hand-selected at all. So it was extra important to ensure her family has no power, because if they did, that would mean there cannot be a pathocracy, at least not as we understand it.

So it kinda makes sense to me that royals, by definition, cannot be in charge, and unlikely to be the evil creatures that the propaganda and non-critical thinking conspiracies like to promote. They’re much more likely to be like any other family but put in a permanent fishbowl and given a golden piano. Look at what happens to regular people who become celebrities and are unprepared for it. Bad things often result! That alone can mess a person up pretty badly. The fact that they handled it so well is a testament to their strength of character and sense of duty. It is incredibly easy to go from normal to “Miley Cyrus” or “Britney Spears” and experience a completely mental breakdown given the pressures of publicity, fame, money, etc.
 
Last edited:

Brewer

Jedi Master
I lived near Balmoral for about a year in '92 and had a beer or three with the people that worked there and here's what they said...

Queen Mother, lovely. Her Daughter not so much but her Mum was hard to beat. Hubby, bit aloof and arrogant. Chuck, he was OK, I served him and his regiment, The Gordon Highlanders. He seemed sad, somewhat beaten, his regiment had a lot of time for him, said he went out of his way to ensure their welfare. Princess Anne was liked and respected.

Diana was disliked, treated the staff like dirt, one account I heard 3 times from different people is as follows. Her official gowns travelled and were stored flat in large, awkward samsonite cases. She would demand a certain outfit to wear and the ghillies would lug the the thing upstairs. She would change her mind and demand another one be brought upstairs, wash, rinse repeat. Same would happen with horse riding, the horses were prepared then she would change her mind. They claimed she was manipulative and used the press to her advantage. Whether they created her or she was born this way I do not know.

The Fleet Street Press were revolting, they stayed in the hotel I worked at when Princess Anne was getting married. They groped and propositioned the housemaids and left revolting bodily excretions in their rooms.
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
I am astounded at the people on here who seem to be 'Royalists'. These people are parasites. There is no other word for them. An archaic institution that is corrupt to the core. Like all the western governments of the world they are complicit in hoarding wealth and using a system to keep people in fear and poverty. The common people are their plaything. They lack everything that a human being should be. Quite frankly it's sickening.

Your reading skills must be very limited. After all you've written in this thread, I'm thinking this forum is not the right place for you.
 
Bjorn said: The Royal family has been held HOSTAGE ever since. If not earlier. How sad and horrible. So much for being ''privileged''. They are more like victims, really. They have to put on a show. If they don't, just look at the past. Or look at Diana. The Queen has very little freedom of movement in this game.

It is worth recalling that Lord Rothschild once famously quipped during the 19th Century: "I don't care who sits on the throne of England as long as I have the power to issue money". This was at a time when Queen Victoria ruled over a vast empire.

One of her most famous prime ministers was Benjamin Disraeli who was also a fiction writer: Coningsby (novel) - Wikipedia.

Disraeli spoke of the "Hidden Hand" having a powerful influence behind the scenes, which almost certainly was a subtle reference to the Rothschild family. Today we would refer to the 'Deep State'.

I saw a picture a couple of years back of Prince Charles with Sir Evelyn de Rothschild Evelyn de Rothschild - Wikipedia

In the picture, Sir Evelyn is stabbing his finger into Prince Charles' chest in order to emphasise a point he was making. The point of this picture is that there is a strict protocol with royalty that you are never allowed to touch them unless they permit it. It says a lot, therefore, that Sir Evelyn felt entitled to stab his finger into Prince Charles' chest, which probably reveals where the real power lies. I only wish I had the picture as I would have posted it.
I think this is the picture...it always struck me as Charles receiving a dressing down...certainly it shows who is the submissive one.
 

Attachments

  • 3xldUrB4jFqjuveE-SO-HDmnbAo3R_1itINTWPeu5v0 (1).jpg
    3xldUrB4jFqjuveE-SO-HDmnbAo3R_1itINTWPeu5v0 (1).jpg
    36.2 KB · Views: 41

Ant22

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Its just that they were and probably still are associated with numerous pedophiles in the past which sets off alarm bells if you like. And people, decent people have been silenced for talking about it. Do you use that archaic sense of intuition in your life.?
I'd suggest you read this thread from the beginning. It looks like you haven't becuase this has already been discussed. And if you have but you still chose to write the above then as Laura said in response to another post of yours:

Your reading skills must be very limited. After all you've written in this thread, I'm thinking this forum is not the right place for you.
 
I am astounded at the people on here who seem to be 'Royalists'. These people are parasites. There is no other word for them. An archaic institution that is corrupt to the core. Like all the western governments of the world they are complicit in hoarding wealth and using a system to keep people in fear and poverty. The common people are their plaything. They lack everything that a human being should be. Quite frankly it's sickening.
That's a very sweeping statement, very broad and actually incorrect, certainly for the modern monarchy. As noted by many, the Royals are tools of sorts, albeit with exceptional wealth, but that doesn't guarantee happiness nor emotional comfort....duty, and more duty. Roles that they were born into and by accident or design, responsibilities that some probably didn't expect to come their way. Like all families, some have fared better than others. England suffered it's first civil war post invasion by the Normans just after the death of Henry 1. 14 long years of wannabe monarch fighting wannabe monarch....a time when common people were used as pawns, as playthings and a time where the country suffered extremes of violence and depravity because of wounded egos and 'it's mine!' mentality.
 
Top Bottom