Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old November 22nd, 2010 #61
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Leonard Rouse
Default










Last edited by Leonard Rouse; November 22nd, 2010 at 10:14 AM.
 
Old November 22nd, 2010 #62
Darius Appleby
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: high rainfall coastal strip of the White Continent nation
Posts: 3,597
Arrow The Governor General DID SACK an Australian Government

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
The Queen has no real constitutional power. She's just a tourist attraction, piece of history and a rubber-stamp for new laws. Sure, she could, if she wanted to, tell the Prime Minister "oh no you don't, matey" and sack him (provided she has someone in the wings to form a new Cabinet) but this has never been done and is in cases of extreme crisis only. What constitutes an extreme crisis has never been determined.

I don't know if the Governor-General in Australia, as her representative, has any real power, but she doesn't have any herself. Without wishing to disrespect her, she is to Britain what Mickey Mouse is to the States - a tourist attraction - because she has never even come close to sacking the Govt. of the day, no matter what they do.
The UK doesn't have a written constitution, but rather relies on centuries of constitutional conventions which are understood by the monarch and the parliament and it works well.

The difference with Australia, which only came into being in 1901 after the British Colonies became States, is that we do have a written constitution, adopted by the people, and can only be changed with the approval of a majority of people in a majority of States. This means 4 out of 6 States. If New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland (3 largest States) people want change, but those in Tasmania, South Australia, and Western Australia (3 smaller States) people oppose the change then it fails. The 1999 republic referendum was rejected by a majority in EVERY State.

The Australian Constitution also gives the upper house The Australian Senate the ability to block all legislation including supply (money) bill from the lower house The House of representatives, making the Australian Senate unusually powerful in the world. The Senate is a State house, with equal numbers of Senators from every State regardless of population size, this being the balance needed for the colonies to unite and form a Federal Government.

The 1975 constitutional crisis was caused by the Senate blocking a supply bill from the unpopular and radical left-wing Whitlam Labor Government. The Governor General, acting on behalf of the Queen, DID SACK THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT. The Opposition was called to form a caretaker government before an immediate general election of both houses, where the people threw out the Whitlam Labor Government.

So our Monarch, represented by our Governor General does play an active role in matters of good government when required in Australia.

Our Constitutional Monarchy works very well.

Pity there is nobody to sack Obongo. You have a flawed republic in the US.
 
Old November 22nd, 2010 #63
Ted Maul
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darius Appleby View Post
The UK doesn't have a written constitution, but rather relies on centuries of constitutional conventions which are understood by the monarch and the parliament and it works well.

The difference with Australia, which only came into being in 1901 after the British Colonies became States, is that we do have a written constitution, adopted by the people, and can only be changed with the approval of a majority of people in a majority of States. This means 4 out of 6 States. If New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland (3 largest States) people want change, but those in Tasmania, South Australia, and Western Australia (3 smaller States) people oppose the change then it fails. The 1999 republic referendum was rejected by a majority in EVERY State.

The Australian Constitution also gives the upper house The Australian Senate the ability to block all legislation including supply (money) bill from the lower house The House of representatives, making the Australian Senate unusually powerful in the world. The Senate is a State house, with equal numbers of Senators from every State regardless of population size, this being the balance needed for the colonies to unite and form a Federal Government.

The 1975 constitutional crisis was caused by the Senate blocking a supply bill from the unpopular and radical left-wing Whitlam Labor Government. The Governor General, acting on behalf of the Queen, DID SACK THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT. The Opposition was called to form a caretaker government before an immediate general election of both houses, where the people threw out the Whitlam Labor Government.

So our Monarch, represented by our Governor General does play an active role in matters of good government when required in Australia.

Our Constitutional Monarchy works very well.

Pity there is nobody to sack Obongo. You have a flawed republic in the US.
It works so well your country is being flooded with pakis and gooks.
 
Old November 22nd, 2010 #64
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darius Appleby View Post
The UK doesn't have a written constitution, but rather relies on centuries of constitutional conventions which are understood by the monarch and the parliament and it works well.

The difference with Australia, which only came into being in 1901 after the British Colonies became States, is that we do have a written constitution, adopted by the people, and can only be changed with the approval of a majority of people in a majority of States. This means 4 out of 6 States. If New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland (3 largest States) people want change, but those in Tasmania, South Australia, and Western Australia (3 smaller States) people oppose the change then it fails. The 1999 republic referendum was rejected by a majority in EVERY State.

The Australian Constitution also gives the upper house The Australian Senate the ability to block all legislation including supply (money) bill from the lower house The House of representatives, making the Australian Senate unusually powerful in the world. The Senate is a State house, with equal numbers of Senators from every State regardless of population size, this being the balance needed for the colonies to unite and form a Federal Government.

The 1975 constitutional crisis was caused by the Senate blocking a supply bill from the unpopular and radical left-wing Whitlam Labor Government. The Governor General, acting on behalf of the Queen, DID SACK THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT. The Opposition was called to form a caretaker government before an immediate general election of both houses, where the people threw out the Whitlam Labor Government.

So our Monarch, represented by our Governor General does play an active role in matters of good government when required in Australia.

Our Constitutional Monarchy works very well.

Pity there is nobody to sack Obongo. You have a flawed republic in the US.
Yes, I knew the Gov. General sacked the Government in Australia, but didn't know when or the circumstances. I just knew the Queen had never done it here.

The UK doesn't have a written constitution, but rather relies on centuries of constitutional conventions which are understood by the monarch and the parliament and it works well.

That's a better way of explaining it. It works well in that it's functional and ticks along nicely - not in that it works well for *us*. Just to clarify.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old November 22nd, 2010 #65
Darius Appleby
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: high rainfall coastal strip of the White Continent nation
Posts: 3,597
Arrow Not as many jews and muds, and niggers in Australia as the USA

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
Your nation has been highjacked by jews and your country flooded with muds.
Please, tell me more about the superiority of a constitutional monarchy.

I define good national government by it's exclusion of jews.
Conversely Whites can make any system workable when left to our own devices.
It is time again to try and convince those from the USA that they are not the only country on the planet.

There are other countries, and we are actually different to you.

The Earth is also not flat. Really.

Less than 1% of the 22 million Australian population are jews, and less than 1% are muslims, but they are growing faster.

Also, we don't have millions of niggers and latrinos, and mexcrement breeding up a storm.

So things are a lot better here, as Oprah will find out soon when she visits.

Yes there are problems, but compared to the USA and the UK, our semite muslim and semite jew problems are far less.

Again, yes there are problems with non-White immigration, but it isn't as bad as in your republic.

Our Constitutional Monarchy system of government produced the White Australia Policy for the great majority of our national history. We were keeping out niggers, slanty-eyed yellow skinned asians, and even swarthy Europeans while they kept infesting your country.
 
Old November 22nd, 2010 #66
Darius Appleby
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: high rainfall coastal strip of the White Continent nation
Posts: 3,597
Arrow Dry country Australia, not much flooding....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Maul View Post
It works so well your country is being flooded with pakis and gooks.
Less than yours, but then you have a bigger jew problem, especially in your parliament.
 
Old November 22nd, 2010 #67
Ted Maul
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darius Appleby View Post
Less than yours, but then you have a bigger jew problem, especially in your parliament.
So much for the perfect system though eh?
 
Old November 22nd, 2010 #68
Darius Appleby
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: high rainfall coastal strip of the White Continent nation
Posts: 3,597
Arrow just the least worst, not perfect...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Maul View Post
So much for the perfect system though eh?
I didn't say a Constitutional Monarchy was a perfect system, I said it was the best system of government. Nothing on the planet beats it.

Australians had the opportunity through the directly elected delegates to the constitutional convention to pick any system of government they could imagine and agree on. They chose a minimalist model for change, but it still required 30 or 40 amendments to the Australian Constitution of 1901 (as amended over the years by referendum) to remove all references to the Crown and replace them with a president.

The Australian people said that the Constitutional Monarchy could not be improved on, and overwhelmingly rejected any change.

Let this be a lesson for any other country wanting to do away with the Crown and adopt a republican model that is inherently unstable and prone to producing political assassinations. It doesn't matter if you don't like any particular member of the Royal Family, or even if you don't like the religion or the ancestry of the whole lot, it is the concept of the Crown as an integral part of a Constitutional Monarchy which makes it better than anything yet conceived by man.

The great thing about a parliamentary system as opposed to a presidential system is that occasionally you do get people like Pauline Hanson and Nick Griffin elected to them, and just by being there and speaking their views they will have an influence on the parliament and the government.
 
Old November 23rd, 2010 #69
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Prince William and Kate Middleton to get married on the anniversary of the marriage of Adolf Hitler to Eva Braun. Wonder if that was Harry's idea.....
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old November 24th, 2010 #70
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/ce...r-wedding.html

Quote:
Hats at the ready! It’s going to be the wedding of the century, and now you can get your hands on tickets. Prince William and Kate Middleton have announced plans to release one hundred invitations to their wedding to the public, and allocate them using a special a lucky draw.

The newly engaged pair – who confirmed the date of their wedding as April 29 yesterday, have reportedly requested the public be involved in their special day, and want to invite a handful of lucky people to the ceremony.

It’s thought Kate and William will hold a ballot for the golden tickets, which will see holders rub shoulders with royalty and celebrities alike at the special event in Westminster Abbey.

'William and Kate wanted the British people involved at a deeper level than simply holding street parties,' one insider at St James’s Palace revealed.

'They were crystal clear on this from the outset and were delighted when the idea of a random selection was mooted.

'Those lucky enough to land an invitation will only find out when it drops on their door mat.'

It’s thought the fortunate few will have to comply to a strict dress code, and receive a special security check, but when given the all clear will receive an ‘access all areas’ pass to the nuptials.

Yesterday the couple’s private secretary Jaime Lowther-Pinkerton confirmed they were ‘over the moon’ and couldn’t wait to get on with planning their big day.

‘The couple are completely over the moon. I've never seen two happier people,’ he revealed. "They're on cloud nine like any other newly-engaged couple'.
I hope they put something on those tickets about not slapping them straight up on eBay! I feel sorry for the ones chosen, because the press will be all over them like a rash - it will be like something out of Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory!
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old November 24th, 2010 #71
Gibson
.
 
Gibson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,718
Gibson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marieclaire
It’s thought the fortunate few will have to comply to a strict dress code, and receive a special security check ...
It goes (literally) without saying, there will also be an ethnicity/culture check. "Are you a heterosexual White British person?" - if so, your chance of getting an invitation will be reduced by 90% to ensure 'proper' representation of minorities.
 
Old November 24th, 2010 #72
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibson View Post
It goes (literally) without saying, there will also be an ethnicity/culture check. "Are you a heterosexual White British person?" - if so, your chance of getting an invitation will be reduced by 90% to ensure 'proper' representation of minorities.
Yes, it's going to be interesting to see the demographics of the chosen few. Can you imagine the absolute hilarity should one end up on the desk of such as Andrew Brons or someone like that?
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old November 24th, 2010 #73
Gibson
.
 
Gibson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,718
Gibson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
Yes, it's going to be interesting to see the demographics of the chosen few. Can you imagine the absolute hilarity should one end up on the desk of such as Andrew Brons or someone like that?
Imagine if the whole guest list didn't include enough jews. The wailing, kvetching, rending of garments - only a new BBC series about the holocaust, combined with extra holocaust indoctrination in schools could compensate for the offense.
 
Old November 28th, 2010 #74
Ian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cumbria, England
Posts: 1,208
Ian
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian View Post
So what are these emails?

The comment you made earlier this year about Mike Newland was a bit strange. You said that the reported attack on him by 'anti-fascists' in the 1990s was done by queers he propositioned. The strange bit was you said on here that you made enquiries among the street people in that area.
That's the only time my path crossed with yours then, as I lived in the Borough of Camden and myself went round to attempt to see Newland at that time. He lived in Kentish Town, then a quite harshly respectable lower-middle skilled-working class area with quite a few hardline hard working Mediterranean families. Newland lived quite near Kentish Town Police Station. Street people were a rare sight in Kentish Town, although they were all over Camden Town a mile or so down the road. But the junkies etc. panhandling around the yuppies, students and tourists down there, would be unlikely to know the happenings in hardline respectable Kentish Town up the road. So you saying you made enquiries among the street people seemed a bit strange to me.
Any comment, Andy?
 
Old April 5th, 2011 #75
andy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 12,833
andy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian View Post
Any comment, Andy?
As I lived within 2 minutes walk of Leighton Road the street newland lived on I speak with more authority than you.Further here is the link to the map with Kentish Town Police Station
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&...ed=0CCYQnwIwAQ

People can see for themselves it is north and east of Leighton Road and Kentish Town station which was then and now a congregating place for rent boys.To the extent that it was even featured on Crmewatch after a civillian was kicked to death there.Your knowledge of the area is that of a transient I maintained a home there for nigh on ten years and it was my London base.Perhaps newland was sucking your cock and its clouded your memory.
__________________
The above post is as always my opinion

Chase them into the swamps
 
Old April 5th, 2011 #76
andy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 12,833
andy
Default

Returning to the topic of the thread I had a very tasty kate and wills meat pie steak,carrot,shallot,red wine aussie style pastry
__________________
The above post is as always my opinion

Chase them into the swamps
 
Old April 13th, 2011 #77
Jimmy McQuade
Hrvatski Prijatelj
 
Jimmy McQuade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: SFV
Posts: 1,131
Jimmy McQuade
jewsign

LACHAIM to all the monarchy worshippers on this board

Quote:
LONDON - As far as Royal Weddings go, Prince William and his bride-to-be Kate Middleton are apparently all about bending the rules.

The happy couple, who recently released their wedding itinerary, decided not only that Middleton will not arrive at her wedding in a carriage but in the limousine attacked by students during riots in London three months ago, but that they will also celebrate with a traditional Jewish custom.

According to the Jewish Chronicle, Prince William will end the Anglican ceremony with the traditional glass-breaking custom known to end Jewish weddings.

Buckingham Palace spokesperson Esther Calthorpe-Watts said in a statement "They want everyone to feel a part of the wedding. And while, religiously, the ceremony will be completely Anglican in nature, they felt it appropriate to include these small gestures towards other faiths. "

"If the congregation at the Abbey wants to wish the happy couple 'mazeltov' we will be very happy but this will be totally optional," she said.
http://israel.thejview.com/religion/...ewish-wedding/



FTQ
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Truth At Last View Post
A faggot is a traditional dish in many parts over here
 
Old April 25th, 2011 #78
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

bumping thread for the new round of "is she, isn't she".
 
Old April 25th, 2011 #79
RickHolland
Bread and Circuses
 
RickHolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jewed Faggot States of ApemuriKa
Posts: 6,666
Blog Entries: 1
RickHolland
Default

goldsmith Name Meaning and History

English: occupational name for a worker in gold, a compound of Old English gold ‘gold’ + smiđ ‘smith’. In North America it is very often an English translation of German or Jewish Goldschmidt.

http://www.ancestry.com/facts/goldsm...y-history.ashx


Acording to "jewornotjew" site Kate Middleton isn't Jewish.

http://www.jewornotjew.com/profile.jsp?ID=307


Kate Middleton parents and ancestry.

http://www.wargs.com/other/middleton.html

http://johndenugent.com/english/engl...st-race-mixing


The mummy probably isn't a religious Jew but she is racially a turco-mongol Khazar.
























__________________
Only force rules. Force is the first law - Adolf H. http://erectuswalksamongst.us/ http://tinyurl.com/cglnpdj Man has become great through struggle - Adolf H. http://tinyurl.com/mo92r4z Strength lies not in defense but in attack - Adolf H.

Last edited by RickHolland; April 25th, 2011 at 01:22 PM.
 
Old April 25th, 2011 #80
RickHolland
Bread and Circuses
 
RickHolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jewed Faggot States of ApemuriKa
Posts: 6,666
Blog Entries: 1
RickHolland
Default

Take a look at her biological sister Pippa Middleton's Asiatic Khazar features.

__________________
Only force rules. Force is the first law - Adolf H. http://erectuswalksamongst.us/ http://tinyurl.com/cglnpdj Man has become great through struggle - Adolf H. http://tinyurl.com/mo92r4z Strength lies not in defense but in attack - Adolf H.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:54 AM.
Page generated in 0.15327 seconds.