Commonwealth Games – Commonwealth Glory

Santula

New Member
Oct 6, 2010
7
0
1
До Свидания #13

Commonwealth Games – Commonwealth Glory



by

Amitakh Stanford

4th October 2010

The current Commonwealth Games serve to remind us of the glorious British conquests and that Queen Victoria crowned herself Empress of India.


Australia is amongst the many British colonies, and is part of the present-day British Commonwealth. It was formally a prison colony, with many of the convicts having been political prisoners. Today, the Queen is still Australia's head of government. Contrary to common belief, she is not just a figurehead. The Queen can dissolve the Australian Parliament whenever she pleases. She also has the power to control money appropriations, appoint and remove judges, negate proposed laws, and has full command of the armed forces.



If President Obama seeks troop support from Australia, he could bypass the Prime Minister altogether, and instead, discuss the matter directly with the Queen's representative, the Governor-General of Australia. The Governor-General is the commander in chief of Australia's naval and military forces – that is, the Queen has the final say in Australian military deployments. It is the Queen who decides whether Australian troops remain in Afghanistan. Why the Queen does not always exercise her powers can be explained by the lesson learned from Charles I, which has taught British monarchs to use Parliaments as a front.


The figurehead in Australia is not the Queen or her representative, the Governor-General. The figurehead is the Prime Minister, who is allowed to rule only at the Queen's pleasure. Since 1975, the Queen has unceremoniously discarded two first-term Prime Ministers who ran afoul of her. Gough Whitlam and Kevin Rudd know very well that popular Prime Ministers can be removed by the Queen before the people have the chance to re-elect them.



The Afghanistan war is now being compared to the Vietnam conflict; there is no end in sight and the casualties are mounting. Many people are in favour of withdrawing the troops from foreign soil and stop fighting what they perceive as an American war. Let the leaders who cry for war fight the battles on the front line. Perhaps there would be fewer who would put their hands up for war.
If the Australian people want their troops out of Afghanistan, they need not petition the Prime Minister. They should instead petition the Governor-General or send their pleas directly to the Queen. Under the Constitution, the Governor-General is the commander in chief of the naval and military forces in Australia and she is the Queen's representative. If Australians want to empower their Prime Minister, they would need to have a referendum to amend the Constitution to become a republic in order to break away from British rule. Of course the referendum could prove to be a futile exercise because the Constitution cannot be changed without the Queen's assent. One does not have to be psychic to know that the Queen would not readily relinquish her power.


The Commonwealth Games should remind us all that many countries are under British influence or control.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
До Свидания #13

Commonwealth Games – Commonwealth Glory



by

Amitakh Stanford

4th October 2010

The current Commonwealth Games serve to remind us of the glorious British conquests and that Queen Victoria crowned herself Empress of India.


Australia is amongst the many British colonies, and is part of the present-day British Commonwealth. It was formally a prison colony, with many of the convicts having been political prisoners. Today, the Queen is still Australia's head of government. Contrary to common belief, she is not just a figurehead. The Queen can dissolve the Australian Parliament whenever she pleases. She also has the power to control money appropriations, appoint and remove judges, negate proposed laws, and has full command of the armed forces.



If President Obama seeks troop support from Australia, he could bypass the Prime Minister altogether, and instead, discuss the matter directly with the Queen's representative, the Governor-General of Australia. The Governor-General is the commander in chief of Australia's naval and military forces – that is, the Queen has the final say in Australian military deployments. It is the Queen who decides whether Australian troops remain in Afghanistan. Why the Queen does not always exercise her powers can be explained by the lesson learned from Charles I, which has taught British monarchs to use Parliaments as a front.


The figurehead in Australia is not the Queen or her representative, the Governor-General. The figurehead is the Prime Minister, who is allowed to rule only at the Queen's pleasure. Since 1975, the Queen has unceremoniously discarded two first-term Prime Ministers who ran afoul of her. Gough Whitlam and Kevin Rudd know very well that popular Prime Ministers can be removed by the Queen before the people have the chance to re-elect them.



The Afghanistan war is now being compared to the Vietnam conflict; there is no end in sight and the casualties are mounting. Many people are in favour of withdrawing the troops from foreign soil and stop fighting what they perceive as an American war. Let the leaders who cry for war fight the battles on the front line. Perhaps there would be fewer who would put their hands up for war.
If the Australian people want their troops out of Afghanistan, they need not petition the Prime Minister. They should instead petition the Governor-General or send their pleas directly to the Queen. Under the Constitution, the Governor-General is the commander in chief of the naval and military forces in Australia and she is the Queen's representative. If Australians want to empower their Prime Minister, they would need to have a referendum to amend the Constitution to become a republic in order to break away from British rule. Of course the referendum could prove to be a futile exercise because the Constitution cannot be changed without the Queen's assent. One does not have to be psychic to know that the Queen would not readily relinquish her power.


The Commonwealth Games should remind us all that many countries are under British influence or control.


I'd like to see links proving your assertions that the Queen removed 2 Australian Prime Ministers. Also, the thread title is VERY misleading as this has nothing to do with the Commonwealth games.
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
Ok, then how about YOU prove the assertions the nut case has made.

Sigh. Convincing the unwashed masses something called "proof" in the business of politics is so tiresome. Answer: there is none. Politics is what you believe, within certain broad limits.

His ideas are not entirely correct of course, but the fact is, the queen in Windsor castle, is the head of state of several nations. The current govt in Ottawa questioned it when M Jean said she was. Being a queen is not like being the head of the local boys club. People will listen to the queen before they will listen to a scout player.

The fact that some people have these crazy ideas is not good, because politics is the art of the possible. And being the head of several states has its own possibilities. No? I would like to be the head of several states. Bring it on!!!! I will take the theory and run with it. Plus, I'd be rich. Rich people have power. No?
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Sigh. Convincing the unwashed masses something called "proof" in the business of politics is so tiresome. Answer: there is none. Politics is what you believe, within certain broad limits.

His ideas are not entirely correct of course, but the fact is, the queen in Windsor castle, is the head of state of several nations. The current govt in Ottawa questioned it when M Jean said she was. Being a queen is not like being the head of the local boys club. People will listen to the queen before they will listen to a scout player.

The fact that some people have these crazy ideas is not good, because politics is the art of the possible. And being the head of several states has its own possibilities. No? I would like to be the head of several states. Bring it on!!!! I will take the theory and run with it. Plus, I'd be rich. Rich people have power. No?


If you can't back up the assertions that you and your kind make, then it is just so much bullshyte.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
You like kakato, totally materialists. Kakato won't do research to save his life and you are totally ignorant of politics. Sorry, can't help you. Just watch for that station coming your way.


No, I would say you are the one that is clueless. I completely disagree with your assertions. They are so much BS.
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
You seem quite clueless because you cannot offer anything more than one sentence answers.

Try to do something called presenting an argument, bring a few facts together and then draw a conclusion and let others express their opinion on what you are saying. But you are unable to do that so far, you have not written something called a paragraph. Show us or clam up.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
You seem quite clueless because you cannot offer anything more than one sentence answers.

Try to do something called presenting an argument, bring a few facts together and then draw a conclusion and let others express their opinion on what you are saying. But you are unable to do that so far, you have not written something called a paragraph. Show us or clam up.


You seem to be confused, it is not me making damning assertions against the Crown. It is you and the OP's author. You are the ones that need to prove those. Something neither you have done. So it is you that needs to put up or shut up, not me.