The Diamond Jubilee...Viva Britania!!!

Well I can't help these countries if their leaders are either stupid or greedy. These people can't succeed without assistance or the stupidity of the people that deal with them.

It's like the scams on QL, who do you blame if a person gets ripped off again and again. The person doing the scam or the stupid idiot that keeps falling for it time and time again.

Again you find someone else to blame. While you and other corrupt leaders put the blame elsewhere the lives of the people in these countries will not improve.

So why did your system not work on Japan and Malaysia and now the rise of China and S. Korea?

In my opinion some of the countries and leaders in Africa and Asia use colonialism of the past as a conveinient tool to deflect from their own problems. For most of Africa and Asia the European empires ended well over a generation ago. When will these people take responsiblity for their own problems?

Lets set this against an example. Japan.

Japan was totally destroyed after WWII, however they did not sit back and blame the Americans or the Europeans or anyone else for their fate. They put their country back together and became an economic power house with a very high standard if living for their people.

Not getting into a pointless debate to feed your bitterness..Your entitled to your opinions they just don't matter to me! ;)

What are you proud of Pink? you are proud of your Queen's imperalistic past and the horrendious murder and looting it had acheived on the many nations it forcefully conqured throughout time ?

Time to shun the old imperalstic bullox . Vive la République!

Had a fab time watching the celebrations of the jubilee on the tv,makes you feel homesick but also proud to be British!.. :)

Why is this blatant hijacking being allowed to continue. This is supposed to be a happy thread.

MarcoNandoz-01 you sad git. Your political posts are so tiresome. Get off your bloody soap box on this thread and go elsewhere with your garbage.

The OP of this thread was to celebrate our Queens Jubilee. Some people are just not happy unless they are pizzing in somebody else's pool. I just don't understand why they feel the need to try and prevent other peoples happiness.

It's pathetic people like this that make me question why I even bother to stay on QL.

You are just here for the argument, you ask a question and I give you an answer, then you try to twist it another way. Very poor.

The British Empire along with most is part of history now, it's worth learning from but not arguing about. You are looking for someone to blame and they are all dead.

I stand against repression in all its forms, whether it is by governments, by countries against others or religious.

I agree we should not make the same mistakes of the past and I don't understand why you think I believe differently.

Terra Nullus. Just a few examples.

Falkland Islands (popular at the moment)

Pit Cain

St Helena

A variety of means, some economic, some terra nullius and some through open warfare. No one said it was pretty or right but that was how the world worked in those days and all the people that participated in the expansion of empire are now dead, so who are you going to blame?

It terms of land mass and population under its control the British Empire was the most successful.

I think Belgium in the Congo, France in Vietnam and the Japanese in China and Korea, Soviet Union at home and eastern Europe, Afghanistan under the Taliban would probably win the prizes for most oppressive and genocidal regimes. The British were mere amaeturs compared to those despots.

I don't think you can attack the English just because they were more successful at Empire Building than everyone else. Each country's flag is steeped in blood and their head of state is representative of that.

Do we include Queen Beatrix and King Juan Carlos in this list then ?

Well I just think that it’s about time to question why they might mindlessly wave a flag steeped in a bloody and imperialist tradition without doing the research.

And yes the queen of England was and will forever remain as the symbol of British barbaric expeditions around the world. The head icon of an empire responsible for the murder of thousands of people the millions and millions of people they enslaved conquered looted and subjugated in the name of the British Empire and its monarchs! Of which the union Jack is the symbol.

All you guys can moan about this that etc

But you seem to be missing the point. This was an opportunity for the UK to celebrate something as a whole and in these difficult times its a welcome diversion!

And the fact remains that this event was watched around the world by millions of people just as the royal wedding was, so there are obviously some people still interested in the Queen.

No need to get so jealous about the UK being in the spotlight!

Tigerboyy you have no idea what you are talking about on this subject, or indeed any other thread you have posted on. Your debating skills are of a retarded level, you make false statements and have been proved to have little understanding of the topics you try to poison with your twisted mind.

I think this site is too sophisticated for you, why not give another website a go where your low IQ would fit in more.

Most people in the UK will be having some sort of party celebration over the four day weekend. The support for the Royal family is pretty hight right now in the UK. Obviosuly last years royal wedding helped. For most its an excuse for a good knees up! I am going to a party today (the sun has also come back out!) and aim to ear and drink quite a lot!

Yesterday there were reminders of our history from when we pretty much ruled the world to hearing stories of WW2 veterans. One of which was talking about how he was fired 60ft into the air and into the sea when his ship was hit by a torpedo and he had to cling onto a dead shark before being rescued! What a hero!

I will miss these celebrations when I move to Qatar next week.

God save the Queen, Rule Britannia and all that!

...and we can continue in the same vein

to discuss politics... its was opened to congratulate Queen Elizabeth on her 60 years on the Throne. No one is wanting to discuss democracy and monarchy.

As TB said, go open another thread if you want to discuss this.

Your disrespect shows your maturity... there isn't any!

God bless our queen..What a fantastic woman!..People can moan all they like about our Royal family it's means nothing and achieves nothing..Outside views are just that outside!..Proud to be British always will be!

One day President Clinton was visiting Queen Elizabeth and she decided to take him for a tour of London in the Royal Carriage. Now the carriage was being pulled by six Royal Stallions and one of them suddenly passed gas. It sounded like a twenty one gun salute it was so loud. The smell permeated the inside of the carriage and the Queen was totally devastated.

"I apologize profusely for the terrible smell inside the carriage", she said.

"Oh, that's alright", said the President, for a minute there I thought it was the horse." O_O!

The point here is that in the UK, the monarchy and democracy happily co-exist.

Jubilee Ql party to celebrate the imperialist forces of the Queen.

To those who have a problem with our Queen; This thread is for us to celebrate her. If you dont want to say anything nice please just leave the thread. If you want to start a new thread to moan and bitch like you have to on every thread, be my guest.

86 year old granny standing for more than 3 hours straight wow that in itself is a remarkable achievement, let alone ruling Britain for over 60 years now.

He is right, if the monarchy didn't exist you wouldn't invent it....

As long as you don't live in the country, you can defame it as much at possible?

Tiggerboy, you are totally disrespectful to someone that means as much to the Brits as the Emir means to Qataris.

Its such a pity that people who don't really have anything nice to say on this thread don't just stay away.

Ha, would seem like the mods agreed with me.... Tiggerboyy has been deleted!

You got a star Brit ;)

But only a silver one, not a gold one as it is MEN in Black.;)

Man in Black ?

ahhhh...so MIB was right after all....:0

Well, he has, for quite some time. HE must quite like her :)

God save the Queen

The British did bring much of the technology to India, but India would have caught up eventually. Maybe they'd be in a better position right now if the British did not take all their money. The size of India could be hindering its advancement today. 1 billion people in one country is hard to deal with, maybe a multitude of countries would have been better. Overall the British screwed up India.

How many more edits to your posts are you going to make?

Well then you learned nothing to correct yet another misguided statement of yours. That's two in one thread.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Textile_Industry

During the late 17th and 18th century there were large export of the Indian cotton to the western countries to meet the need of the European industries during industrial revolution. Consequently there was development of nationalist movement like the famous Swadeshi movement which was headed by the Aurobindo Ghosh.

There was also export of Indian silk ,Muslin cloth of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa to other countries by the East Indian company (The East Indian Company was the British by the way Tigerboyy).

According to Kearney’s ‘Retail Apparel Index’ India ranked as the fourth most promising market for apparel retailers in 2009

Oh yes I see what you mean "they completely destroyed local industry in particular textiles. Sent then back to the dark ages."

No rush.... whenever you are ready

I skipped class on loads of days. Now please educate me and provide some proof of your statement.

What!!! Oh come now Tigerboyy... you are going to have to backup a statement like that with some facts.

Exactly Brit, in the same way that when the Romans left us we acquired all of their technology and systems. And when every other blooming country that invaded us after that left, we acquired their advances as well.

You don't here me moaning about the blooming Vikings do you TigerBoyyyyyy? There is no pleasing some people geeesh.

Most of the railway and mountain road infrastructure , along with judicial and government systems was set up by the British.....

Good thing my outfit does not clash with the barge. Thanks Kat ,for giving me the head's up :)

Example please...

MN-01: The laws may seem outdated, but the monarchy certainly is not out of touch. You can see by the gatherings today, that the Queen is still respected and loved by most..

Created an Empire and then shipped it all back home

The outdated laws posted by TB reflects how out of touch British Monarchy is!

What is the Queen's role?

Elizabeth II is a constitutional monarch: that is, she is Britain's head of state, but her executive powers are limited by constitutional rules. Her role is mostly symbolic: she represents Britain on state visits and on ceremonial occasions. According to the royal website, her primary role is as a "focus of national unity".

She is queen of 16 former British colonies, including Australia, Canada and New Zealand; and head of the Commonwealth, a multinational body created after the dissolution of the British empire.

What powers does the Queen have?

The Queen has the right to rule: the people of Britain are not citizens, but subjects of the monarch. Most public servants must swear an oath of loyalty, or make an affirmation of their loyalty, to the crown.

Although the Queen is politically neutral, she has the right to be consulted and to "advise and warn" ministers. Otherwise her residual powers - the "royal prerogative" - are mostly exercised through the government of the day. These include the power to enact legislation, to award honours (on the advice of the prime minister), to sign treaties and to declare war.

But royal prerogative is the subject of controversy, because it confers on governments the power to make major decisions without recourse to parliament. When Edward Heath brought Britain into the EEC in 1972, parliament was not consulted until afterwards. Similarly, Margaret Thatcher used royal prerogative to go to war in the Falklands in 1982.

The Queen has two individual powers that could cause a political crisis if they were ever exercised. She may refuse a government's request to dissolve parliament and call an election, if she believes a government can legitimately be formed. She also has the right to choose the prime minister: a formality in the case of a clear majority, but potentially controversial after an inconclusive general election. This almost happened in February 1974, when Labour failed to win an overall majority but the Conservatives considered power-sharing with the Liberals.

What land does the Queen own?

As hereditary sovereign, the Queen owns the crown estate - almost 120,000 hectares of agricultural land, plus the seabed around the UK. Its statute includes some archaic rules: through the crown estate, for example, the Queen can claim ownership of all whales and sturgeon that are washed ashore. But the estate did turn a profit of £147.7m in 2000-01, all of which was credited to public funds.

Also held by the Queen as sovereign are the occupied royal palaces, such as Buckingham Palace, St James's Palace, Kensington Palace and Windsor Castle. The Queen's private property includes the palaces at Balmoral and Sandringham.

Much of the Queen's private income comes from the Duchy of Lancaster - an estate comprising more than 19,000 hectares of land, which made the Queen £7.3m before tax in 2000-01. The Duchy of Cornwall, which comprises more than 50,000 hectares, funds the Prince of Wales.

How much does the monarchy cost to run?

The Queen's "head of state expenditure" - official expenditure relating to her duties as head of state - is met from public funds. The total spend in 2000-01 was £35m, a figure which excludes the cost of security from the police and army, and of soldiers on ceremonial duty. Apologists for the monarchy point out that this figure is much lower than the profits of the crown estate.

The most controversial part of the expenditure is the Civil List, the money provided on a 10-year cycle for the running of the Queen's household. The spend was £6.5m in 2000-01, but has been fixed at £7.9m per year until 2011 - despite the fact that the Queen made a £35.3m profit out of the money provided for the previous 10 years.

The £35m for 2000-01 also includes almost £1m which went to the Queen Mother and Duke of Edinburgh; £15.3m spent on funding the occupied royal palaces (listed above), and £5.4m spent on travel (much reduced since the decommissioning of the royal yacht). The rest went on pensions and other expenses incurred by government departments, including postal services, "equerries and orderlies", and the administration of honours. £1.5m went on the Palace of Holyrood House, Edinburgh.

Balmoral and Sandringham are maintained out of the Queen's personal income.

Does the Queen pay tax?

The Queen pays tax on a voluntary basis from her private income, but not on "head of state expenditure". But she did not pay almost £20m of inheritance tax after the death of the Queen Mother: this, says the royal website, is primarily because "constitutional impartiality requires an appropriate degree of independence for the sovereign".

What is the Guardian's position on the Queen?

The Guardian has launched a legal campaign against the 1701 Act of Settlement - which excludes Roman Catholics, Muslims and other non-Protestants from succeeding to the throne. It is also campaigning against the Treason Felony Act of 1848, which inhibits discussion of republican forms of government.

A Guardian editorial in December 2000 hoped that "in time we will move - by democratic consensus - to become a republic".

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/may/16/qanda.jubilee

And now for a massive cut and paste that will explain all

Long live the Queen!

.

Tiger - with the tax they pay and the income from tourism, not only do they not cost anything but they generate money.

So Tigerboyy... that's Villaggio and the UK you are going to boycott now then. Where next?

Tell you what Tigerboyy, how about you don't celebrate on principle, and those that want to go ahead and have a great time?

Tiger - the Queen 'costs' far less to run than the office of the president of the USA and generates far more income in tourism

It all started with the Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that Arthur, was to be King....

the Crown Estate produced £200 million for the Treasury in the financial year 2007–8, whereas reported parliamentary funding for the monarch was £40 million during the same period

The sovereign is subject to indirect taxes such as value added tax, and since 1993 the Queen has paid income tax and capital gains tax on personal income

Tiger, what made you so bitter?

Yeah, you have to be a bit of a Scrooge not to appreciate Her Majesty today.

Mandi

Tiger - they do pay tax and imagine having a job in which you can never retire. She performs over 300 public engagements a year and she is 86 years old?? Not sure I would want that type of job??

Nice bridges. Nice view too from the Royal Barge. How I luurve to travel vicariously - avoiding the crowds but still enjoying the event ... except when my satellite tv gets interrupted with the heavy rain...

Oh dear Tigerboyy... making statements without knowing the facts. The Queen does pay tax.

Watching it now, wish I were there!

That wouldn't worry me.... I only follow the rugby ;)

That would mean that Celtic and Rangers could never play in the Championship and Scots would need a visa to go to Blackpool :O(

Watching the pomp and circumstance on BBC ... lovely flotillas.

Earlier, viewed a brief documentary about HM always reading and keeping abreast of current issues in UK and all over the world. Delivered to her every day in a red document box, which she reads and is put up to speed. Quite inspiring.

As for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge bringing in ever more revenue and touching the lives of mere mortals - Yeah, that's cos they are new but HM has been "touching lives of mere mortals" for 6 decades. She was once young and beautiful and captured the imagination of the public, like Kate Middleton is doing now.

/Btw, Kate looks lovely in her red outfit, matching the red carpet and the Royal Barge's interior. I would have said matching the "seats" but then again, thought that might draw some flak.

Yeah Cornwall will be the next to leave. Everyone is off now.

symbol of colonial rule? wasn't she who ended the colonial british empire?

even scotland may leave the UK!!

Hummmm... I'm not far right and I don't think I am brain dead, but if I was back home I would most certainly be celebrating.

Brit: O_o! was that before or after God said

(( Let There Be Light ))

why the hell would anyone want to celebrate The Diamond Jubilee of an old Royality who is in her position because of an accident of birth

this schizophrenic monarchy and democracy thing

cannot go!

Why not ? Remember when, the Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that Arthur, was to be King....

Yes, I admit it. I was mesmerized :O)

Actually LP I kinda like the pagentry, the pomp and ceromony but logically it makes no sense for a modern country.

Brit, that's what happens when you cross the road without looking left and right in the Red light district...fancy dressed Queens almost run you over.....:P

Did I ever tell you about the time I was nearly run over by Queen Beatrix in Amsterdam ?

moza, people (not you and not me) like stories and tales about monarchs. It's so fancy.

Tourism, is that true? Would people stay away from the Tower of London is the monarchy was no more, would Hampton Court be empty without the Queen or a King? I dobut it. Plus they could open Buckingham Palace up all year round so people could visit such a historic building and marvel at the art.

She brings in a lot of tourism, and parliament is accountable to her. I can't say much else for the other royals, although Kate Middleton and Prince William have brought in even more revenue and touch the lives of the mere mortals...

What an ancient way to generate money!

She is a figure head, not just for the country, but for the Church of England, The armed Forces and also the Commonwealth.

Yes, i beleive that she has a place in modern democracy and her presence generates millions of pounds through tourism.

Ofcourse , every now and then , she gets the odd diamond from nations who love her :O)

She has some nice hats, but what does she really do and is she really appropriate for a modern democracy?