Originally Posted by
Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
HMQ should do it herself. She'd be fine if she whacked them in Canada. It's crown territory and you can't have a Regina vs Regina court case. Though if Phil did it, could she just say that Regina doesn't want to press charges in this instant?
I wasn't a monarchist until recently when hanging around with my commie raver mate in Paris.
He couldn't believe that the courts here would prosecute politicians. I explained that HM's courts are older than HM's parliament (1066 and before vs 1265), let alone than the PM (1720). So if one of HM's politicians lets down the state (Thomas Moore, Thomas Cromwell, Jeffrey Archer, the Lib minister and recent Lab bint who lied about driving offences etc) then HM's courts will try them.
When we discussed HM's troops being loyal to the monarch, not the president or PM, my French commie mate and this English anarchist both decided that perhaps monarchs weren't such a bad thing after all.
Btw, he supports Melenchon {France Insoumise}, whose policies at the last election were to create a 6th republic, resign and call fresh elections.
He wanted a titular president, with the PM and executive drawn from and answerable to parliament. Basically the UK system - or more the Indian/Italian one where the monarch is replaced by powerless president as head of state.
I said to him "That's what we've been telling you to do since before your revolution. You should have listened to us 200 years ago."
He said "That's the trouble. We only ignored it as we didn't want to admit England was right."
Whereas ironically, I want a 2nd Empire here, with me as emperor, with lots of great art, literature and boulevards. I may send you to a re-education camp, but at least it will be modelled on Haussman.
Reply With Quote