UN to Britain: Abolish Your Monarchy

Perhaps the UN could convince the EU to hold a vote (non-referendum, of course) that will force the UK to demolish Buckingham Palace.

Perhaps it's time to abolish the fucking UN.

I always thought it was their job to help keep wars from breaking out, not sticking their noses into, and micromanaging, everybody's business.

Um, isn't Saudi Arabia a monarchy?

Oh, and:
1) the Queen should appoint Maggie Thatcher as ambassador to the UN. Then Iron Maggie can tell the UN to suck her dick.
2) the actual wording gives me fucking hives.

Yeah, I know one is a direct quote and the other is not, but this, right here, sums up why the UN is a joke. "Must" and "consider" do not go together in any document that is worth the paper it is printed on.

Um, isn't Saudi Arabia a monarchy?

Oh, and:
1) the Queen should appoint Maggie Thatcher as ambassador to the UN. Then Iron Maggie can tell the UN to suck her dick.
2) the actual wording gives me fucking hives.

Yeah, I know one is a direct quote and the other is not, but this, right here, sums up why the UN is a joke. "Must" and "consider" do not go together in any document that is worth the paper it is printed on. Talk about your spineless "weasel words".
[Weird. Double. Ah well, since this one got repped, I won't delete it out. ]

We got it the first time dude.

Plus, the UN will never tell Saudi Arabia to do anything. Duh.

Well, if legitimate government in Britain is now the UN's biggest concern, the UN most not have anything productive left to be doing.

All that money that the Queen and her cronies are blowing up in smoke could be going to Ireland.

How about they SELL the monarchy to Ireland? Move the whole shebang to Dublin, sorta like a Disney-type deal?

Great Britain to UN:

[pie]



[/pie]

Wales has offered to mediate the accord in exchange for a strong consideration for a referendum legalizing sheep shagging.

Here's some irony.

Over half the member states of the UN Human Rights Council failed to achieve a ranking of "Functioning Democracy" according to the Economist's Democracy Index, and over a third are given the lowest possible rating -- "Authoritarian Regime."

Shit like this should get under the skin of every red blooded Englishman. They been getting by for a looong time with the crown the way it is and they introduced a lot of democratic changes to the world, fuck the UN. The UK is my second favorite country and some days it runs neck and neck with my favorite.

Are there any Englishmen, or just in the museums?

Oh, sure but I should have said Briton, don't want to leave out the men in skirts up North and the sheep shaggers to the west and such

Well, they're right.

Autocracy is wrong on pricinple. I'd expect Americans, who got rid of the Queen as their head of state, to recognise this.

We also recognize the will of the people and history also shows us what happens when there is no monarch and parliament rules alone. The thought of that would scare the crap out of me.

King George was indeed quite the fairy.

If the will of the people is to maintain these clowns as their heads of state, then they can be elected to that position. And nobody is talking about parliament ruling alone.

If the British people desire to abolish the monarchy, then that should be their decision. Not some edict handed down by the UN.

Just consider them permanently elected. I kind of like the Idea of the queen, looking out for the country and being removed from and above politics. The brits can shit can her if they really want to and she knows this, so that is a check in itself against her becoming at tyrant. When I lived there I had much more problem with parliament and their outragious taxes than anything to do with the crown.

Doesn't matter if the UN is right or not.

If the British people want to get rid of the monarchy, that is THEIR decision, their choice, and their business.

You should understand that....going by the Ireland/EU thread.

God save the Queen.

I'm seeing the second denial of the royal assent since Queen Anne. Let's not forget, The sovereign is the supreme commander of the military. There's not much they could do sans a revolution to stop her from asserting control if she ever wished.

And we should have started our own royal dynasty rather than take the road which has led to the hell we're in now.

Except maybe parliament taking her fucking head like they did charles the 1st

They haven't the balls anymore. Frankly, it's an abomination that the Sovereign has stood by the last few decades and has done nothing to circumvent the destruction of English pride and the English people by the muslim "invaders," I meant to say guest workers...

Just when I think the UN is as silly and irrelevent an organization as there could ever be, they prove me wrong by showing that it is possible to be much sillier and even more irrelevent. There are some valid arguments for abolishing the monarchy and having a written constitution with a bill of rights (though the two are not mutually exclusive; the monarchy continued even after the king was forced to accept the conditions of the Magna Carta), but there are other reasons for maintaining the present system. The decision belongs to the British people. The UN should mind their own business. The UK is guilty of "human rights abuses" only by stretching the term to cover the isolated injustices that occur in any society, which pretty much takes away any teeth from a genuine recognition of human rights abuses in countries where they do occur.

^I didn't even think about the Magna Carta when reading this... Wasn't that the first document giving rights to the people and even what led to rules of constitutional law today? All that from the English... funny.

Exactly. Contrary to popular American opinion, democracy and rule by the people was an English concept (inspired by more ancient societies, of course), not something the American colonists dreamed up to overcome the unalleviated tryanny of a brutal dictatorship.

Good one. Being descended from the tyrant of the sixth century house of Wessex is not an appropriate way to appoint a head of state.