what's the difference ????

[Lustral]

Any nudz of that new princess?

Shitty 400x zoom ones...



They do get funded by tax payer - I think it cost £37M for the Queen alone last year (travel, state visits, repairs and general maintenance costs on fuck know how many enormous properties...). Like I said, they do make more through tourism. They are the the people Hollywood celebs wanna be piced alongside.

[Deacon Jeschin]

Ok......One group consists of a bunch of assholes dressed in stupid looking outfits.

The other group is the Klan.......

[TuHolmes]

America is less than 300 years old. We are the current bully on the block, but we aren't shit within the grand scheme of things.

My favorite football team is the "New England" Patriots. Clout.

You are using a football team and region to say that the British Royal Family has clout.

I will disagree with your premise.

[King Shizzo]

You are using a football team and region to say that the British Royal Family has clout.

I will disagree with your premise.

Then why do they call it " New England"?  New Hampshire.....etc...

No offense Tu, but that "region" made America.

[Fortress]

Shitty 400x zoom ones...



They do get funded by tax payer - I think it cost £37M for the Queen alone last year (travel, state visits, repairs and general maintenance costs on fuck know how many enormous properties...). Like I said, they do make more through tourism. They are the the people Hollywood celebs wanna be piced alongside.

I would like to see her royally-manicured brunette bush.

Look into it, will you, please?

[The Scott]

The difference, as near as I can tell, is that in England they love their queens and so allow them to live in a palace.  Here in America we give them so-called "reality shows" based upon either cooking or bridal fashions.

Ugh.  Disgusting.

[TuHolmes]

Then why do they call it " New England"?  New Hampshire.....etc...

No offense Tu, but that "region" made America.

People left that "region" to FOUND "New World".

They didn't "make" any of it.

The people who made the United States of America were much more self made than any of the "Royal Family" by LEAVING that "region".

No offense taken, but your view of what made the United States is quite small if you believe that that Region had anything to do with this country at all. Especially 400 years later.

[King Shizzo]

People left that "region" to FOUND "New World".

They didn't "make" any of it.

The people who made the United States of America were much more self made than any of the "Royal Family" by LEAVING that "region".

No offense taken, but your view of what made the United States is quite small if you believe that that Region had anything to do with this country at all. Especially 400 years later.

400 years later?...... Patriots from the north east United States, absolutley won the war.

[visualizeperfection]

Shizzo is brainless.


No one agrees with him, yet he thinks he is right 

[King Shizzo]

Shizzo is brainless.


No one agrees with him, yet he thinks he is right 

The silent majority side with me. HTH.

I am an advocate for smart, independent thinkers.

[visualizeperfection]

The silent majority side with me. HTH.

I am an advocate for smart, independent thinkers.

What is your living situation?

[TuHolmes]

400 years later?...... Patriots from the north east United States, absolutley won the war.

Ok, first I was talking about the region known as Europe, so your region and mine are not the same thing.

Much confusion.

Secondly.

I wasn't really talking about it, but if you want to talk about it, we can.

Who was the General? Where was he from? Where was the white flag raised and the surrender of the British?

Most of the states hit the hardest were in the Mid-Atlantic actually.

[King Shizzo]

Ok, first I was talking about the region known as Europe, so your region and mine are not the same thing.

Much confusion.

Secondly.

I wasn't really talking about it, but if you want to talk about it, we can.

Who was the General? Where was he from? Where was the white flag raised and the surrender of the British?

Most of the states hit the hardest were in the Mid-Atlantic actually.

Hate to break it to you, but the founding fathers of America were British colonists. Plus, we are kinsman to Cornwallis.

We fought a civil war with the British for our "independence".

[SF1900]

Shizzo is brainless.


No one agrees with him, yet he thinks he is right 

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." 

[TuHolmes]

Hate to break it to you, but the founding fathers of America were British colonists. Plus, we are kinsman to Cornwallis.

We fought a civil war with the British for our "independence".

You are confusing a lot of points Shizzo.

I know where the people were from.

They were not all British Colonists. Some were from France, some from Spain actually.

I know what the Revolution was fought for.

Not to pick, but are you drinking now? It seems as if some of the conversation is getting mixed in with other points.

[King Shizzo]

You are confusing a lot of points Shizzo.

I know where the people were from.

They were not all British Colonists. Some were from France, some from Spain actually.

I know what the Revolution was fought for.

Not to pick, but are you drinking now? It seems as if some of the conversation is getting mixed in with other points.

Then you admit my initial point. Americans are comprised of foriegners. Are we Americans now? Absolutely, but we also should not forget our roots.

[TuHolmes]

Then you admit my initial point. Americans are comprised of foriegners. Are we Americans now? Absolutely, but we also should not forget our roots.

Where did you make an initial point that we as a nation are all immigrants?


Your initial point was that the Royal family had some kind of power. Which they do not.

After that you kind of jumped around.

I never denied we were all immigrants, but that has nothing to do with the Royal family having power or clout.

[King Shizzo]

Where did you make an initial point that we as a nation are all immigrants?


Your initial point was that the Royal family had some kind of power. Which they do not.

After that you kind of jumped around.

I never denied we were all immigrants, but that has nothing to do with the Royal family having power or clout.

My original point was that the Queen and King monikers traditionally, carry more weight than the President tag.

They are all puppets at this point.

[TuHolmes]

My original point was that the Queen and King monikers traditionally, carry more weight than the President tag.

They are all puppets at this point.

Traditionally? You mean prior to the empires all being dissolved? Sure. I'll give you that.

However, today. In the world we live in. The Queen and King monikers mean nothing.

Understand that the Kings and Queens of the empires were Kings and Queens because they ruled by "Divine Right".

This means that they believed throughout history that they ruled because "God saw them as better" and therefore put them in charge.

This all ended after World War I.

Let's have a history lesson.

The British House of Windsor was related to the the Keisers of Germany AND the Tsars of Russia. They were all inbreeds as they all married each other believing that they should keep the bloodlines pure as they ruled by "Divine Right". Tsar Nicholas II of Russia was almost a twin to King George the V of the British Empire.

Now, when WWI broke out and all of the relatives of Queen Victoria put the entire world into one of the most devastating wars of all history, the common people. Serfs of Russia, people of the Prussian Empire, citizens of the Ottoman Empire, AND the commoners of the British Empire all started to rise up against their leaders who led by "divine right".

This is why the Tsars were overthrown, the Keiser exiled, and the Ottoman Sultans forced to allow individual countries to rule themselves.

The only reason why the British Monarchy was not completely overthrown was because they:

Fooled some people by changing the name to The House of Windsor, gave more power to the people via Parliament, completely ignored Tsar Nicholas' request for asylum (thereby guaranteeing his own cousins death), and gave up most of the control of their empirical territories.

The days of Monarchs and Empires were officially done and with those days. All of the "clout" they held.

[visualizeperfection]

Traditionally? You mean prior to the empires all being dissolved? Sure. I'll give you that.

However, today. In the world we live in. The Queen and King monikers mean nothing.

Understand that the Kings and Queens of the empires were Kings and Queens because they ruled by "Divine Right".

This means that they believed throughout history that they ruled because "God saw them as better" and therefore put them in charge.

This all ended after World War I.

Let's have a history lesson.

The British House of Windsor was related to the the Keisers of Germany AND the Tsars of Russia. They were all inbreeds as they all married each other believing that they should keep the bloodlines pure as they ruled by "Divine Right". Tsar Nicholas II of Russia was almost a twin to King George the V of the British Empire.

Now, when WWI broke out and all of the relatives of Queen Victoria put the entire world into one of the most devastating wars of all history, the common people. Serfs of Russia, people of the Prussian Empire, citizens of the Ottoman Empire, AND the commoners of the British Empire all started to rise up against their leaders who led by "divine right".

This is why the Tsars were overthrown, the Keiser exiled, and the Ottoman Sultans forced to allow individual countries to rule themselves.

The only reason why the British Monarchy was not completely overthrown was because they:

Fooled some people by changing the name to The House of Windsor, gave more power to the people via Parliament, completely ignored Tsar Nicholas' request for asylum (thereby guaranteeing his own cousins death), and gave up most of the control of their empirical territories.

The days of Monarchs and Empires were officially done and with those days. All of the "clout" they held.

Why are you still wasting your time with this miserable mouthbreather??

[King Shizzo]

Traditionally? You mean prior to the empires all being dissolved? Sure. I'll give you that.

However, today. In the world we live in. The Queen and King monikers mean nothing.

Understand that the Kings and Queens of the empires were Kings and Queens because they ruled by "Divine Right".

This means that they believed throughout history that they ruled because "God saw them as better" and therefore put them in charge.

This all ended after World War I.

Let's have a history lesson.

The British House of Windsor was related to the the Keisers of Germany AND the Tsars of Russia. They were all inbreeds as they all married each other believing that they should keep the bloodlines pure as they ruled by "Divine Right". Tsar Nicholas II of Russia was almost a twin to King George the V of the British Empire.

Now, when WWI broke out and all of the relatives of Queen Victoria put the entire world into one of the most devastating wars of all history, the common people. Serfs of Russia, people of the Prussian Empire, citizens of the Ottoman Empire, AND the commoners of the British Empire all started to rise up against their leaders who led by "divine right".

This is why the Tsars were overthrown, the Keiser exiled, and the Ottoman Sultans forced to allow individual countries to rule themselves.

The only reason why the British Monarchy was not completely overthrown was because they:

Fooled some people by changing the name to The House of Windsor, gave more power to the people via Parliament, completely ignored Tsar Nicholas' request for asylum (thereby guaranteeing his own cousins death), and gave up most of the control of their empirical territories.

The days of Monarchs and Empires were officially done and with those days. All of the "clout" they held.

The President is essentially the "king" of America. Neither the Royal Family, nor the President has real control. That  belongs to Congress and the Parliament, respectively.

[TuHolmes]

The President is essentially the "king" of America. Neither the Royal Family, nor the President has real control. That  belongs to Congress and the Parliament, respectively.

Not true at all.

Our fundamental rule of government is not the same as Parliamentary.

The President has veto powers where the Monarchies do not.
The legislative branch is 1/3 the total branches of our government. The British Monarchy is maybe 1/100th. They have almost no power at all.
The President is an elected official. The House of Windsor is not as the President does not rule by "Divine Right", but at the behest of the people who voted him in.

They are as I stated, basic figureheads. They (The King or Queen of the Crown) can speak in Parliament, but have no say over its direction what so ever.

Now, if you are saying that the President makes no policies of his own volition, or he is simply a pawn for someone else. Then that's an entirely different subject.

I'm speaking about the rules of government as they pertain to two completely different groups.

[King Shizzo]

Not true at all.

Our fundamental rule of government is not the same as Parliamentary.

The President has veto powers where the Monarchies do not.
The legislative branch is 1/3 the total branches of our government. The British Monarchy is maybe 1/100th. They have almost no power at all.
The President is an elected official. The House of Windsor is not as the President does not rule by "Divine Right", but at the behest of the people who voted him in.

They are as I stated, basic figureheads. They (The King or Queen of the Crown) can speak in Parliament, but have no say over its direction what so ever.

Now, if you are saying that the President makes no policies of his own volition, or he is simply a pawn for someone else. Then that's an entirely different subject.

I'm speaking about the rules of government as they pertain to two completely different groups.

You know exactly what I am saying.

Btw, I have nothing but respect for you. A good debate is never personal .

[TuHolmes]

You know exactly what I am saying.

Btw, I have nothing but respect for you. A good debate is never personal .

Truly I must not. As I do not seem to agree with your statements.

I am not saying anything in regards to either of us on a personal level. I'm simply discussing the differences in the premise of a Monarchy versus a Constitutional Republic and how they may or may not apply to today's current world view.

[King Shizzo]

Truly I must not. As I do not seem to agree with your statements.

I am not saying anything in regards to either of us on a personal level. I'm simply discussing the differences in the premise of a Monarchy versus a Constitutional Republic and how they may or may not apply to today's current world view.

The only difference, is a pond.