There is an alternative - Please, let's work it out together!
Big Dissings
Two days ago I received a load of comments on my video "So Sez Kez 117 - The Queen, Piers Morgan and keeping secrets" from a chap called 'stewartkee'. Here they are...
It's Clear Your Not A Details Person. Everything You've said is so far off the reality that I Hardly Know Where to Begin. But Here Goes: (1) The Queen Signs laws that Parlament passes up to her, not the other way round.
(2)
What are the advantages of monarchy?
In that form of monarchy to which we aspire, a hereditary parliamentary monarchy, the monarch is an impartial head of state quite contrary to a president who as a rule is a member of a political party. Moreover the monarch is a symbol of identification for all citizens; as head of state he not only represents politics but also culture and tradition.
3)
Democracy and monarchy are these not opposites?
That depends on which kind of monarchy one is talking about. A parliamentary monarchy where the monarch is the head of state but governance lies in the hands of a government elected by the citizens. Today there are such parliamentary monarchies in Great Britain, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands and others.
(4)
Today, according to the UN, the countries with the highest standard of living worldwide are headed by monarchies.
Ask Your Yourself how safe You Would Have Felt a few years back when the French Fascists gained a Majority. The other Parties had to combine to face down the threat. What if they couldnt combine? For the Reasons I've Stated Above the Britain wouldn't have that problem. During the Nineties, the Spanish Army tried to sieze power in Spain. Who stopped them? The King. If True Democracy exists in any form that is it.
And Where You Aware that the Founder of the House of Windsor, Prince Albert, Was President of The National Socialist Crusades for the Extinction of Slavery, Child Work Laws and Dueling. Or That Elizabeth II was Credited by Nelson Mendella as the One Person in Britain who was Demanding his Release From the Very Begining of his Arrest.
The 3 Billion a Year The Crown Estates Give The Treasury Does a lot. What Gorden Brown spends it on is another matter. The Princes Trust is one of the Highest Ranking Charities in Britain. In All Honesty we can't force you to get smart, sooner or later your going to have to read a book: Try reading Elizabeth II by Pimlott: He's a respected Political Historian rather than a scandel monger.
The Queens sole reserves are to Advise, Encourage and warn the current Prime Minister. (Advise He Might Choose not to Take) With over 50 years of experience that makes her important as an adviser. Yet she is also politically neutral, and is someone that the entire country can look to as a figurehead that is above party-politics. She is also there to represent the minorities of Britain through her role as head of the Commonwealth, and because she is not elected figure, she can do so.
Put this way, Politicians serve majorities because majorities put them in power. But for the Queen, who is looking far beyond the next 4 to 10 years the picture is different. It is in her interest to make sure that all the people in her country are represented.
Take a look at the Queens golden Jubilee and at the pictures of the people there. Youll see minorities waving Union Jacks, North Irish Flags aside English Flags, Welsh Flags aside Scots Flags. Youll see Black and Asian people with union jacks painted on there faces. You dont see that behaviour in front of 10 Downing Street. Its because she represents them all of us. In Britain you can feel Proud to be British and yet ashamed of the Government in power.
Look at the Iraq war. In America people said Were Ashamed to be American But in Britain, they said Were Ashamed of the Government they could still feel proud to be British because British was represented by the Queen, who is not political. Likewise, in America, if you didnt agree with the President, you where accused of being Un-American and unpatriotic. You where called traitor.
But in Britain, you could still attack Government policy and no one accused you of disloyalty to the country. Because the peoples Loyalty was to the Queen, not to the Prime Minister. When Blair tried to suggest that those who didnt support his view on war where disloyal to Britain, he was attacked on all sides of the house as trying to pose as a head of state. He had to apologise for it.
So I replied with ...
Wow! Thanks for the input, I can see this has you a little riled, which is all I can hope for at this stage really. I am merely spreading the question, the answers have to come from your own journey.
I have admirable respect for your knowledge, but my point is a basically fundamental one.
Good people aren't greedy, and they don't watch people suffer.
Wishing you the best of days
Kerry-Ann
xXx
and yesterday he replied with ...
And How Are They Being Greedy? They Give 6 Billion Pound a Year to the People and take back only 10 million. That's Hardly greed. No-one is saying they arn't rich. Rich dosen't make them greedy. How do they watch people suffer. Look at the Charity work they do. They do that besides there royal duties.
Remember the difference between an intellectual and a fanatic is that an intellectual is willing to change his or her opinion as the facts present themselves. You seem to be unwilling or incapable of doing this.
So I put...
Were you to present me with facts that deserved a change of opinion, then you would find that I am both willing and more than capable.
The views that you have presented only state what they've told you to think.
These people care not for you, your family, your health and wellbeing, nor your soul.
I, however, do. And even though you don't believe me, which your hostile approach displays quite clearly, if we don't address these issues we're all stuffed.
Big Hugs
Kerry-Ann
xXx
... and then, this morning, I found this lovely compliment...
Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. I'll debate with anyone who wants to debate the pros and cons on Monarchy. What I don't have time for is a Conspiracy nut. I wont comment again since I have better things to do than waste my time with someone who is clearly to pig ignorent to even understand the system she's discussing.
So I replied...
Amen to that one Mr Kee.
And it's spelt 'ignorant' btw.
Thank you for your time
xXx
The reason I've posted all these on here is, admittedly, mainly for John's benefit. Because I know that he is brainier than me in such matters, I would like to know if I have done anything wrong with this conversation that I could've handled better. I seem to have royally titsed this chap off (pardon the pun), and as far as I can see it's because I wouldn't agree with the things he's been taught to believe by the people whom he's defending, simply because they're lodged deeply in his memory synapses.
I will be blatantly honest and say that I still haven't fully read and digested what he said, not least because I'm not keen on being attacked - as you know - but also because there is no need for me to become overwhelmed with political niggly-pigglies. Those are their tactics, confuse and bamboozle.
I must admit that I am a little disappointed in myself for pointing out a spelling mistake, but I wrote it whilst I was still seeing red from being constantly insulted. But then, were I to actually pick to bits his spelling and grammar, I could make him look like an utter fool. I purposefully didn't do that, because it's not the issue and I don't like to attack people. I let myself down in the end.
Of course John, if you do deem his behaviour out of order you're more than welcome to pop a comment of defence on the page in question, so that anyone watching doesn't see me as a raging troublemaker and decide not to take me seriously.
I feel better now, for sharing. I'm not pig ignorant though, am I? (insecurity creepings... down boy!!)
Love to All
Kerry-Ann
xXx
It's Clear Your Not A Details Person. Everything You've said is so far off the reality that I Hardly Know Where to Begin. But Here Goes: (1) The Queen Signs laws that Parlament passes up to her, not the other way round.
(2)
What are the advantages of monarchy?
In that form of monarchy to which we aspire, a hereditary parliamentary monarchy, the monarch is an impartial head of state quite contrary to a president who as a rule is a member of a political party. Moreover the monarch is a symbol of identification for all citizens; as head of state he not only represents politics but also culture and tradition.
3)
Democracy and monarchy are these not opposites?
That depends on which kind of monarchy one is talking about. A parliamentary monarchy where the monarch is the head of state but governance lies in the hands of a government elected by the citizens. Today there are such parliamentary monarchies in Great Britain, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands and others.
(4)
Today, according to the UN, the countries with the highest standard of living worldwide are headed by monarchies.
Ask Your Yourself how safe You Would Have Felt a few years back when the French Fascists gained a Majority. The other Parties had to combine to face down the threat. What if they couldnt combine? For the Reasons I've Stated Above the Britain wouldn't have that problem. During the Nineties, the Spanish Army tried to sieze power in Spain. Who stopped them? The King. If True Democracy exists in any form that is it.
And Where You Aware that the Founder of the House of Windsor, Prince Albert, Was President of The National Socialist Crusades for the Extinction of Slavery, Child Work Laws and Dueling. Or That Elizabeth II was Credited by Nelson Mendella as the One Person in Britain who was Demanding his Release From the Very Begining of his Arrest.
The 3 Billion a Year The Crown Estates Give The Treasury Does a lot. What Gorden Brown spends it on is another matter. The Princes Trust is one of the Highest Ranking Charities in Britain. In All Honesty we can't force you to get smart, sooner or later your going to have to read a book: Try reading Elizabeth II by Pimlott: He's a respected Political Historian rather than a scandel monger.
The Queens sole reserves are to Advise, Encourage and warn the current Prime Minister. (Advise He Might Choose not to Take) With over 50 years of experience that makes her important as an adviser. Yet she is also politically neutral, and is someone that the entire country can look to as a figurehead that is above party-politics. She is also there to represent the minorities of Britain through her role as head of the Commonwealth, and because she is not elected figure, she can do so.
Put this way, Politicians serve majorities because majorities put them in power. But for the Queen, who is looking far beyond the next 4 to 10 years the picture is different. It is in her interest to make sure that all the people in her country are represented.
Take a look at the Queens golden Jubilee and at the pictures of the people there. Youll see minorities waving Union Jacks, North Irish Flags aside English Flags, Welsh Flags aside Scots Flags. Youll see Black and Asian people with union jacks painted on there faces. You dont see that behaviour in front of 10 Downing Street. Its because she represents them all of us. In Britain you can feel Proud to be British and yet ashamed of the Government in power.
Look at the Iraq war. In America people said Were Ashamed to be American But in Britain, they said Were Ashamed of the Government they could still feel proud to be British because British was represented by the Queen, who is not political. Likewise, in America, if you didnt agree with the President, you where accused of being Un-American and unpatriotic. You where called traitor.
But in Britain, you could still attack Government policy and no one accused you of disloyalty to the country. Because the peoples Loyalty was to the Queen, not to the Prime Minister. When Blair tried to suggest that those who didnt support his view on war where disloyal to Britain, he was attacked on all sides of the house as trying to pose as a head of state. He had to apologise for it.
So I replied with ...
Wow! Thanks for the input, I can see this has you a little riled, which is all I can hope for at this stage really. I am merely spreading the question, the answers have to come from your own journey.
I have admirable respect for your knowledge, but my point is a basically fundamental one.
Good people aren't greedy, and they don't watch people suffer.
Wishing you the best of days
Kerry-Ann
xXx
and yesterday he replied with ...
And How Are They Being Greedy? They Give 6 Billion Pound a Year to the People and take back only 10 million. That's Hardly greed. No-one is saying they arn't rich. Rich dosen't make them greedy. How do they watch people suffer. Look at the Charity work they do. They do that besides there royal duties.
Remember the difference between an intellectual and a fanatic is that an intellectual is willing to change his or her opinion as the facts present themselves. You seem to be unwilling or incapable of doing this.
So I put...
Were you to present me with facts that deserved a change of opinion, then you would find that I am both willing and more than capable.
The views that you have presented only state what they've told you to think.
These people care not for you, your family, your health and wellbeing, nor your soul.
I, however, do. And even though you don't believe me, which your hostile approach displays quite clearly, if we don't address these issues we're all stuffed.
Big Hugs
Kerry-Ann
xXx
... and then, this morning, I found this lovely compliment...
Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. I'll debate with anyone who wants to debate the pros and cons on Monarchy. What I don't have time for is a Conspiracy nut. I wont comment again since I have better things to do than waste my time with someone who is clearly to pig ignorent to even understand the system she's discussing.
So I replied...
Amen to that one Mr Kee.
And it's spelt 'ignorant' btw.
Thank you for your time
xXx
The reason I've posted all these on here is, admittedly, mainly for John's benefit. Because I know that he is brainier than me in such matters, I would like to know if I have done anything wrong with this conversation that I could've handled better. I seem to have royally titsed this chap off (pardon the pun), and as far as I can see it's because I wouldn't agree with the things he's been taught to believe by the people whom he's defending, simply because they're lodged deeply in his memory synapses.
I will be blatantly honest and say that I still haven't fully read and digested what he said, not least because I'm not keen on being attacked - as you know - but also because there is no need for me to become overwhelmed with political niggly-pigglies. Those are their tactics, confuse and bamboozle.
I must admit that I am a little disappointed in myself for pointing out a spelling mistake, but I wrote it whilst I was still seeing red from being constantly insulted. But then, were I to actually pick to bits his spelling and grammar, I could make him look like an utter fool. I purposefully didn't do that, because it's not the issue and I don't like to attack people. I let myself down in the end.
Of course John, if you do deem his behaviour out of order you're more than welcome to pop a comment of defence on the page in question, so that anyone watching doesn't see me as a raging troublemaker and decide not to take me seriously.
I feel better now, for sharing. I'm not pig ignorant though, am I? (insecurity creepings... down boy!!)
Love to All
Kerry-Ann
xXx
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by toeg on -
Kerry-Ann,
Don't worry about this idiot. I've responded to his first remarks on your YouTube site. If you want, here are other points he doesn't seem to understand. Oh, I'll just add them.
2. Monarchies intermarry. This is a big no-no according to modern medicine. The gene pool is corrupted when cousins marry each other generation after generation and it is a known fact that the level of intelligence decreases over generations, not the opposite. You're breeding idiots in power, good job.
3. Monarchies cannot exist with democracies. Either they give up power to the people, or the people never have full control. And control of money, e.g. the Bank of England, is control.
4. Bumblebutt, you wrote this, "Today, according to the UN, the countries with the highest standard of living worldwide are headed by monarchies." Can you please name the King of the United States of America?? I'm having a little trouble with that one. "God Save King Obama?"
You're a trained idiot. "The French Fascists?" are you from planet Earth? Jean Le Pen had about as much chance of winning the elections as Mighty Mouse of becoming Secretary of the United Nations. Are you delusional?
-
Permalink Reply by Kerry-Ann Howitt on -
My hero!
Thank you Angel, I knew you'd come to my rescue.
The chap in question (wartking?? hehe) has been very well educated. School, the media etc all pump it forcefully into us that Royalty are 'It'. You rarely see a negative thing about them, so with all the positive thoughts being implanted from day one constantly insisting that without a Monarchy we wouldn't be British, we've just gone along with it out of faith. What we've failed to notice, because it's been taught as fact that we're going about things just the right way, is that the people who decide how we live, are the very ones who benefit from us being kept in the dark. They've forced us to defend them, by telling us that they're fantastic 24/7. It's genius, but awfully cruel.
But America is very patriotic too, yet you have not a Monarchy. So how do you get that patriotism if it's a Monarchy that makes you patriotic?
We believe downright insanities. But it's been implanted in all of us to accept without question the words of secretive, greedy bullshitters in suits. It's the way it is, how it's always been, only ever could be. And who is it who decides that we're educated this way? Yep, the self-same greedy bullshitters aforementioned.
It's embarrassing to watch us at times, because I can see it from 'their' side and know how stupid they think we are, how they laugh at us and our desire to be like them. They feel themselves to genuinely be superior to other people, and they have the brass neck to go to church on a Sunday???
Thou hypocrites!
Oooh I'm off, I'm getting radgie (just made it up John, it means seriously titsed off)
Love you geezer, thank you again, so very much.
Big Kisses
Kerry-Ann
xXx
-
Permalink Reply by toeg on
-
No problem.
I see he responded, so I reciprocated. It's his problem. And if that's educated, I don't even want to know how the other side gets on. His use of profanity is downright disgusting (and humorous because that's just not how we use it over here).
Actually, we are patroitic for different reasons. We are constantly told that we are special (not because of the monarchy, but because of where we are born and our history). We are constantly told that everyone else in the world envy us and they want to live here, but can't. They wake up in the morning crying because they aren't living in the US and they lie awake at night dreaming about stealing aboard a steamship bound for the US. All day long they fantasize about the wonderful life we have here and drool at pictures of us walking around.
In fact, Bush told us in his state of the union address (that's the one to all of us on prime time TV) that "they" hate us for our freedoms. You see, that proves we're the only country in the world with freedoms. No one else has them. We're the only ones and that's because we have a Constitution. We're pretty sure that we're the only ones with one of those as well and if other countries have them, well they are just the inferior variety and can't possibly look as good as ours. We're the best in everything. We're the first in everything. We're the only ones who invent things. We're the only ones who do things right.
I'm sure you remember when Corporal Hull was killed by American planes and a British media team found an American from the same place as the pilots of those jets and asked him what he thought of the incident:
"England, We're So Sorry
Ignorant Boise Man Insults Us All
By Jill Kuraitis, 2-10-07
A Boise man named Eldon Anderson made fools of all of us yesterday when he shot his mouth off to British TV reporters about the 2003 friendly-fire incident involving Idaho National Guardsmen. Here’s the video and comments from viewers on YouTube.
In a stunning statement to ITN Television, Anderson said that the pilot who was involved in the error which killed a British soldier was his neighbor, and that the pilot is a “hero and it’s a damned good thing we have heroes like him in the United States to do the fighting that we’re got to do against terrorists around the world. And you guys better get on board and that whole damned country of yours along with the rest of Europe. You are going to go merrily sucking your thumb like you did in World War II. We don’t need your damned help. We need your cooperation, that’s all we need out of you guys. It’s hard even to get that. We know you can’t shoot, move and communicate, but we’d sure as hell like to have your cooperation anyway.”
In England, the outrage was immediate, and the YouTube site is steaming with comments from angry and hurt British people, many of whom interpret Anderson’s comments as “typical American.”
That's a typical response, alright. I know of many Americans that have no idea why the Brits would be upset because "someone finally told them the truth." I kid you not. This is one of the main reasons why I'm writing the book, American Size Myths. Americans really believe all that bs that everyone in the world says about them. There's a reason those things are said about Americans. It's true!!!
-
Permalink Reply by Kerry-Ann Howitt on
-
This guy has more than proved that he's actually a bit of a robot, and with such folk actually human language can sometimes hurt the head. He's the bull that won't be budged, but the one who will eventually lose out. I leave such things in the hands of the All, he'll get his - trust me!
I think that American, British, Bangladeshi, Turkish or Japanese - we are loving creatures posessing faith in awe-inspiring quantities. It's our education that makes us bitter, jealous or defensive. An education provided by people with a vested interest in us being every negative thing under the sun. We're not stupid for not realising what they've done. But acting the way he has will get humanity nowhere... that's why we're programmed to act that way.
We will show the world that we're all amazing babe, I have utmost faith in that. 'They' are going down. That I know.
You're amazing and I love you - fact!!
Mwah!
Kerry-Ann
xXx
-
Permalink Reply by toeg on
-
Hey beautiful,
I am here but to help as I may. I have some talents which I willingly share for the benefit of the All. You have other talents and you use them well as well. We give what we can, we help where we can, and we do what we can for the benefit of the All.
There are many who are blinded and they usually scream the loudest. It's as if decibel level is indirectly proportional to brain function. The louder it gets, the less brain use is required.
But as you say, it is they who will wind up with the short end of the stick. Sad, but true. And just between you and me, you'll be able to spot me in the crowd watching. I'll be the one clapping frantically with a great big grin on my face.
;)
-
Permalink Reply by Kerry-Ann Howitt on
-
If you come across the video again babe, Stephanie's pipped in her two penneth. I told her yesterday that 'stewart' had called you a 'f*cking retard' and both her and Wayne were spitting chips (more than a tad irate). So she set up a You Tube account purposefully to tell him that he wasn't helping anyone by being so hostile.
See hunni, it ain't just me who loves ya ... it's All of Us!
Mwah!
xXx
-
Permalink Reply by toeg on
-
Video?
I'll send you what I can, but I don't know which video you're referring to.
-
Permalink Reply by Kerry-Ann Howitt on
-
I mean the video stewartkee was arguing with babe.
xXx
-
Permalink Reply by toeg on
-
got it.
The US and UK, two countries separated by a common language. We'd say, "If you ever return (or go back) to that video, you'll find a new comment by Stephanie."
We come by new things only, or people's homes. I guess we don't consider our videos as extensions of our homes, only possessions. I can see the usage, just that we don't look at things that way.
That's probably why you lost the war in the first place. You kept telling the soldiers to "come by" your new possessions, and they kept going back to your homes. "Where'd the soldiers go? I told them to come by an hour ago."
"I think they understood your home, sir. They're chatting with your servants as we speak."
"But how are we to fight these bloody insurgents if they lollygag all day at my place of residence?"
"I'm afraid you'll have to ask them that question, sir."
About
Badge
© 2009 Created by Kerry-Ann Howitt on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
