top 10 professional ponces

no Mr Blair on your list?

No Ed Millibland?

Whilst being one of his biggest detractors you can't say that Harrison wasn't talented pandora. He walked his way to Olympic gold and looked the real deal and had he stayed in the amateurs we could have been comparing him to someone like Teofilio Stevenson. He just couldn't take a punch.

Leon brittain

Prince Andrew

Cliff Richard

Lord Mc Alpine

David laud

Ken Clarke

Ted heath

Cyril smith

Jimmy saville

Peter Morrison..

Sorry mistook the p for another letter!

Our beloved queen, she is the ultimate scrounger. And people love her for it, many poor people I might add

You are obviously devoid of the facts SH.
The Queen hands over 85% of her estates incomes with the remaining 15% used to fund her and the extended Royal Family.
If you require a link just ask me.

Gawd bless ya, Your Majesty.   I'm still wavin' me little flag!  I'M still wavin' Ma'am.  Gawd bless 'er. 

You only got the one flag neydam?
Shame on you if that's the case.

big deal akabula, she is still, along with her family, an incredibly successful scrounger. Unelected freeloaders

It's a little waving flag...not one of those big things. 

How can you be a scrounger when you pay 85% of your income to the treasury.
Don't you understand that she is actually paying her own way as it were.

4.5 million quid a year of tax payers money on leaving their carbon footprint alone, 200 million all in all, it's a myth to suggest they bring in more, the French have never suffered from lack of tourism since. She also enjoyed a nice pay rise during the spending cuts, we have bedroom tax, she managed to avoid that one

a ROYAL family - in 2015, come on now, they are a complete irrelevance, charity is just a ploy, everyone does charity work, I find the coverage they get embarrassing, they're not special people, they not even remotely interesting people. working classes worshipping the upper classes for no apparent reason, give me strength

SH you definitely don't know what you are talking about.
The income from the Royal Estates was  £240m last year.
Yes there are other expenditures such as security that the treasury funds but these costs would be the same for a president.
The tax payer, so you don't need to worry , actually only pays less than £1 per year towards the Royal Family, not sure the exact figure but it was only 52 per person in 2011.

yes and that is 53 pence per person too much, they don't deserve to be in that position aka, what part of that don;t you understand,

Moving from a Monarchy to a Presidency would save nothing and would lose us income from tourism.
The rest of the world is envious of our Royal Family and is the reason why a large %age of tourists visit the UK.
I don't see much worshiping btw, do you? The Monarchy has no real powers nowadays so why the rage.

scandanavian_haven

yes and that is 53 pence per person too much, they don't deserve to be in that position aka, what part of that don;t you understand,

What position is that?

ffs, france get more tourists than britain and they got rid of theirs

So you think that tourist figures rose in France because they got rid of their Monarchy?

You either have the Queen as Head of State or abolish the Monarchy and get a President.
Cost wise there would be no or very little difference.
The Royal Family attracts countless tourists to visit our shores, do you think a President would have the same attraction?
The Queen has no powers but the President would.
The vast majority of UK citizens are in favour of having a Monarchy so surely in a democracy we should respect their wishes.

The vast majority of UK citizens are in favour of having a Monarchy so surely in a democracy we should respect their wishes.


Where's you evidence for this? have we ever had a vote? I've never been asked on the matter.

So you think that post filled with hatred, lies and half-truths with no balance in his argument is worthy of praise.

I got the figures from the press.
Can't remember the exact figures but they were in favour of retaining the Monarchy.
Like all polls it was taken from a cross sample of the population.

They’ll rage furiously at the thought of a hard-working Polish plumber grafting his arse off because he’s “stealing our jobs” yet fawn, grovel, bow and scrape at a collection of German-Greek immigrant benefit-scroungers bleeding the country dry. As long, of course, as they’re wearing crowns while they do so.

Take this paragraph for instance.
They'll all rage etc etc  who only those who favour a Monarchy? Wouldn't think so. So why say it?
Fawn, grovel, bow and scrape. Who? Nobody does this but this is his way of attacking those that chose to defend the Monarchy.
German-Greek immigrant scroungers bleeding the country dry. Gratuitous muck. And so what of their supposed origins. The Queen was born and bred in the UK and Prince Philip fought for the UK in the war.
As regards scrouging read previous posts income £240m £36m retained and £204m gifted to the country.

Despite all Cromwell's efforts is another phrase he uses - ask the Irish about Cromwell.

Hi guys, you both seem to be having a good go at pressing your case/s. I'm certainly not going to get in the middle of this, so this is my only comment on this fred.

Suffice to say that the whole idea that people are still supporting this outdated, centuries ­old  concept born of the feudal systems of medieval Europe, is bewildering in the extreme.

BTW SH have you a link to the article above, I would like to read it if there is more.

that was it boxing/

And who conducted the poll aka?
What makes you think people come to Britian for the royal family? The Queen doesn't stand on her balcony waving at the crowds on daily basis. they are many tourists attractions here.
Whichever way you try to look at it, they enjoy inherited privilege at the public's expense, how
They only decided to play income tax in 22 years ago, how nice of them.
And how do you think they came to afford their private estates?

The ComRes survey showed only 17% favoured a republic.
As regards tourism then I take my info from the UK Tourism Office.
And how did they come to afford their private estates. Same as any of the world's richest people.

This debate opens up every so often. People for and people against.
Everybody entitled to their say but as the majority favour the Monarchy then I guess it's here for the long haul.
Whatever the future I'm sure it'll outlive me.
Anyways I'm finished with the subject.

Did you ever watch the tony Robinson documentary.

There was an illegitimate king which throws all the following totals into disrepute.

I'm with you all the way Scandi.

If we have a president and he/she doesn't do a good job then they can be voted out but not the Royal Family.

Also this tourism stuff, its not as if the Royal Family entertain people in their house or pop out to have a selfie with the public.

akabula
The vast majority of UK citizens are in favour of having a Monarchy so surely in a democracy we should respect their wishes.

scandanavian_haven   
10 Jan 15 03:13
Where's you evidence for this? have we ever had a vote? I've never been asked on the matter.

I didn't vote for over 250,000 grevilles and asians to move into Newham, and I'm pretty sure nobody else did.

The same applies to Tower Hamlets, the London borough to the west of Newham.

And Barking, the borough that joins Newham to the east, which was once considered upmarket to the east end, is getting the same, I'd say nobody there voted for it either.   

But they arrived.


scandanavian_haven   
10 Jan 15 03:03 
ffs, france get more tourists than britain and they got rid of theirs

They also have more muslims than any other country in Europe, do you want the UK to have that dubious honour? 



lovegod    10 Jan 15 09:34 
I'm with you all the way Scandi.
If we have a president and he/she doesn't do a good job then they can be voted out but not the Royal Family.

The Queen has no political power, therefore she can't do a bad job.

The Ministers make the rules and laws etc, and they tell the Prime Minister what they want, so he appears to have the power, and when you vote one coont out, he is replaced by another coont. 


Tourism
When overseas visitors come to London they come to see the Queensa residences and parks.  They spend fortunes and keep a lot of people in work in the tourism industry.

You won't see tour buses going east past the Tower Of London, tourists have no interest in Tower Hamlets or Newham.

They may get a train to the Olympic Park, wander outside  to Stratford and get a flash of multiculturalism, then quickly fack off back to Central London and spend more money.

where does this chap figure in your treacherous Labour Party?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ck1mWPFWv2E

Russel Brand
Russel Brand
Russel Brand
Russel Brand
Russel Brand
Russel Brand
Russel Brand
Russel Brand
Russel Brand
Russel Brand

and his stepbrother gastric

The benefit of a hereditary monarchy is that there is ALWAYS a head of state to uphold the constitution and prevent any politician from seizing power and suspending democracy. If you rely on an elected president, then the death of a president while in office always leaves a vacuum and an opportunity for dictators.

German democracy of the 1930s might have resulted in Hitler becoming Chancellor, but he had no chance of taking total control while the popular President Hindenburg was alive. When the latter died, Hitler simply never got round to organizing new presidential elections and was thus able to usurp the law and proclaim himself Supreme Leader, or Fuehrer.

So, though I agree that the bulk of the Royal Family are indeed professional ponces, I'd rather have them than not. I just wish there weren't so bloody many of them.

I really hate that foreign bloke, german mother, klingon father.

N'kid Grüüphug

Hangs around here under the nick "Bito"

I have a feeling a Ferengi style N'kid Grüüphug is just around the corner.

John Humphrys

Iain Duncan Smith

screaming from beneaththewaves   

So, though I agree that the bulk of the Royal Family are indeed professional ponces, I'd rather have them than not. I just wish there weren't so bloody many of them.

TMM I've always thought that the Monarchy should purely consist of The Queen, Prince Philip, their children and their childrens children.
From a cost point of view this was addressed with the change in funding with the Queen responsible for the extended Royal Family from her personal wealth.