Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stand Tall Prince Philip of England

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stonewall_Jack
    started a topic Stand Tall Prince Philip of England

    Stand Tall Prince Philip of England

    Prince Philip has come under some fire for a recent car crash.

    Prince Philip will not be prosecuted for the car accident he was involved in last month.

    The Crown Prosecution Service said Thursday that the Duke of Edinburgh will not face any charges over the crash near the Sandringham estate, which left a woman in another vehicle with a broken wrist.


    Philip, 97, gave up his driverís licence following the incident, and apologized to the other carís occupants ó two women and a baby.



    https://globalnews.ca/news/4960518/p...h-prosecution/

    People of all ages get into motor vehicle accidents, these things happen. Prince Philip made a mistake and can atone like any man. President Obama has trust in the Prince as a driver. And I stand by Prince Phillip w/e his future choice is wrt driving.




  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post
    I want to be alive, independent and driving when I am in my 90s.
    And I want to bone Jennifer Lopez. That's how likely you're going to be "independent and driving when I am in my 90s."

    Study finds fatality rate for drivers over 85 is four times higher than for teenagers
    The very old may not be Public Enemy Number 1, but they are killing people as never before.

    People on Americaís streets and highways.

    According to a Carnegie Mellon University study, the fatality rate for drivers 85 and over is four times higher than it is for teenagers, who are usually pegged as our most reckless drivers. . . . .

    "Elderly Drivers Cause More Deadly Crashes than Teens," by Ted Landphair, Voice of America, 2 Sep 2011
    - sic

    So do us all a favor: when you reach your dotage, give up the car keys.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stonewall_Jack
    replied
    Originally posted by Von Richter View Post

    Well old chap, that's just absolutely spiffing, but if you want to go foreskin tugging to His Nibs, at least get his moniker right, he's not the Prince of England. It's Great Britain and Her Commonwealth, actually... hope this helps with yer bowing and scraping.
    Thank you friend and there is no issue. I stand with Prince Philip. Motor Accidents happen.

    The absolute last thing I am worried about is a few disgruntled opinions on the internet specifically from HPJ and Joe but NP here I have nothing against these two they just have a misunderstanding. Perhaps they do not see the point, and that is that people of all ages get into Car accidents. I want to be alive, independent and driving when I am in my 90s.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by johns624 View Post

    You used to many big words...he'll never understand that you were complimenting him, since it's never happened before.
    Might cause a meltdown, like what Capt Kirk used to do to robots. Rimshot

    Leave a comment:


  • johns624
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

    It was kinda hard to miss.



    I'll say one thing for you Yorkies: when I can understand you, you sure can paint a vividly repellent picture with mere words, better than most can with a brush.

    The kids should read that, for an object lesson in true mastery of a semi-English language, with a wee bit of artistic flair thrown in for good measure, lubricated by an ocean of lukewarm beer.
    You used to many big words...he'll never understand that you were complimenting him, since it's never happened before.

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    Originally posted by walle View Post

    Who said it was?

    The Queens title isn't the "Queen of England" either but she is the Queen of England, as well as of a number of other nations.

    Calling her the Queen of England isn't wrong, and her connection to the English nation will be stronger (including culturally) than to say her connection to the Canadian nation, of which she is also queen.

    Point is, calling him Prince of England works just fine.
    We got our own dynasty now........kinda sorta...

    Leave a comment:


  • the ace
    replied
    Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post
    His full title is;
    His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth, Baron Greenwich, Royal Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Extra Knight of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Member of the Order of Merit, Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order, Grand Master and First and Principal Knight Grand Cross of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, Knight of the Order of Australia, Additional Member of the Order of New Zealand, Extra Companion of the Queen's Service Order, Royal Chief of the Order of Logohu, Extraordinary Companion of the Order of Canada, Extraordinary Commander of the Order of Military Merit, Canadian Forces Decoration, Lord of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, Member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, Personal Aide-de-Camp to His Majesty King George VI, Lord High Admiral of the United Kingdom.

    Or "Philip the Greek" for short.

    Nowhere is he Prince of England, though his son is Prince of Wales.

    If ever you wanted to show just how stupid royalty is just look up the full titles of any monarch.
    I just call him Stavros.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post


    You noticed
    It was kinda hard to miss.

    Originally posted by Von Richter View Post

    Well old chap, that's just absolutely spiffing, but if you want to go foreskin tugging to His Nibs, at least get his moniker right, he's not the Prince of England. It's Great Britain and Her Commonwealth, actually... hope this helps with yer bowing and scraping.
    I'll say one thing for you Yorkies: when I can understand you, you sure can paint a vividly repellent picture with mere words, better than most can with a brush.

    The kids should read that, for an object lesson in true mastery of a semi-English language, with a wee bit of artistic flair thrown in for good measure, lubricated by an ocean of lukewarm beer.
    Last edited by slick_miester; 21 Feb 19, 09:39.

    Leave a comment:


  • E.D. Morel
    replied
    I agree Mark; it serves a sound purpose but it's still silly.
    There's nothing stopping the Monarch from being the first citizen and the people, through their constitution, from being sovereign. That's the way it is in other European countries which have a monarch.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    There is actually a sound reason why Britain stuck to a monarchy and it's constitutional but has a very practical aspect. England (and Scotland) once had a monarch who was viewed by some as overbearing, arrogant and religiously orientated in a manner some did not like. After a bloody civil war he was replaced with a military dictator who proved to be far more oppressive, a religious bigot and had the allegiance and backing of an army to keep him in power. After his death the country quickly reverted to having a monarch as head of state. The sworn allegiance of the military is to the head of state not to any mountebank politician who has greased themselves in as Prime Minister. As long as constitutionally the HoS has to be the hereditary monarch it becomes impossible for any ambitious general to declare themself as head of state and claim the allegiance of the military to maintain them in power as they do not qualify for the position and cannot do so without a major constitutional change.
    Although it is usually said that Britain does not have a written constitution - in fact we do but unlike many countries it is not written down in a single document but is expressed across a myriad of charters, agreements, conventions, acts and court judgements, all generated over 800 years during which the constitution evolved. This gives us a certain degree of flexibility in making constitutional change in details but makes it extraordinarily difficult to make the major one of changing who is qualified to be HoS as legal references to the monarch in the form of the Crown are spread so widely. A usurping dictator would always be aware of ways in which their authority could be legally undermined. One solution might be to do what Admiral Horthy did in Hungary and have them declared Regent but that didn't turn out too well.
    As it is we have an HoS who has no power (but some influence) and is generally a-political with various relatives who can share the ceremonial load some of whom are quite good at encouraging charitable organisations. It could be worse.

    Leave a comment:


  • E.D. Morel
    replied
    His full title is;
    His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth, Baron Greenwich, Royal Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Extra Knight of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Member of the Order of Merit, Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order, Grand Master and First and Principal Knight Grand Cross of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, Knight of the Order of Australia, Additional Member of the Order of New Zealand, Extra Companion of the Queen's Service Order, Royal Chief of the Order of Logohu, Extraordinary Companion of the Order of Canada, Extraordinary Commander of the Order of Military Merit, Canadian Forces Decoration, Lord of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, Member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, Personal Aide-de-Camp to His Majesty King George VI, Lord High Admiral of the United Kingdom.

    Or "Philip the Greek" for short.

    Nowhere is he Prince of England, though his son is Prince of Wales.

    If ever you wanted to show just how stupid royalty is just look up the full titles of any monarch.

    Leave a comment:


  • walle
    replied
    Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post

    Sure, but his title is not Prince of England in the same way that President Trump's title is not President of Florida.
    Who said it was?

    The Queens title isn't the "Queen of England" either but she is the Queen of England, as well as of a number of other nations.

    Calling her the Queen of England isn't wrong, and her connection to the English nation will be stronger (including culturally) than to say her connection to the Canadian nation, of which she is also queen.

    Point is, calling him Prince of England works just fine.

    Leave a comment:


  • E.D. Morel
    replied
    Originally posted by walle View Post

    Then clearly he's also the prince of England. Unless of course, you exclude the biggest country and nation within the Union i.e England and the English.
    Sure, but his title is not Prince of England in the same way that President Trump's title is not President of Florida.

    Leave a comment:


  • walle
    replied
    Originally posted by Von Richter View Post

    Well old chap, that's just absolutely spiffing, but if you want to go foreskin tugging to His Nibs, at least get his moniker right, he's not the Prince of England. It's Great Britain and Her Commonwealth, actually... hope this helps with yer bowing and scraping.



    Then clearly he's also the prince of England. Unless of course, you exclude the biggest country and nation within the Union i.e England and the English.

    Leave a comment:


  • Von Richter
    replied
    Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post



    First off how about some respect for The Prince of England..
    Well old chap, that's just absolutely spiffing, but if you want to go foreskin tugging to His Nibs, at least get his moniker right, he's not the Prince of England. It's Great Britain and Her Commonwealth, actually... hope this helps with yer bowing and scraping.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X