Royally Screwed: British Monarchy Revealed (5 page)

Monarchy is and always will be a contract between the King and his people. And if we look back into our history, we can see many clear occasions when the people asserted their will and demonstrated that
their
power, regardless of where they are in the human heap, was ultimately the power to be reckoned with.

In 1649, King Charles I plunged England into a terrible civil war.  The basis of this war centred on liberty (the King did as he wished and the people felt they had none) and taxes. 
(The King kept raising them and the people kept paying them.)
  The King raised an army to fight against parliament and his people.  He was not without support and even though many men perished so that he could remain on the throne, he was eventually captured by the Reformists and taken to trial to answer for the following crimes ‘Treason, Tyranny and Murder’.  The court that was assembled to try him would only have been recognized in Australia by the Kangaroo!!

But let’s face it – what kind of justice could there be for this man?  He declared that he didn’t recognize the court
(sounds familiar? Think Saddam 2006)
.  In his opinion, he was only answerable to one person… and that was God.  Unfortunately, God was unavailable and so whether he liked it or not, the King would have to answer to this very mortal court, if he was allowed to speak in his defense, which he wasn’t.  Every time he opened his mouth to talk the crowd drowned him out. 

Once captured, he was even more dangerous to Parliament and the people than he was when he was King
(at the risk of repeating myself… think Saddam 2006)
and they had little choice but to sentence him to death and do it as quickly as possible, before someone raised an army and there would be even more bloodshed. No-one had ever cut off the head of a King before.  They probably weren’t even sure if he would DIE.  Over half of the men on the tribunal bench never even showed up to sentence him, they were so terrified.  These were ruthless and violent times and out of it came a new fundamental law which replaced the conventions by which Monarchy operated.  It was the creation of this new law, finally giving freedom and rights to the peasants.  That became the underlying foundation adopted by the Republic of America, 100 years later. The people had asserted their power and showed they were an army to be respected.  They were a powerful force and ultimately England was a better place for a peasant to live.  Royalty had been constrained and removed and would never be the same again.

Strange as it seems, after everything it had been through, England missed its Monarch.  So after 10 years the country’s new “Protector”, Oliver Cromwell, a clever politician and man of the people, died and England was ready to reinstate a new King.

They brought back the son of the King they had just beheaded, Charles II. Only this time he was to have no real power, he couldn’t tax, he couldn’t create laws he was a constitutional Monarch, a titular figure, who lived at the largesse of his people, and all he really had to do was smile and wave and not fall off his horse.

He died without leaving an heir apparent.  He had 14 illegitimate children but none born on the right side of the sheets, so he left the throne to his brother, James, who was a devout Catholic.  The country ended its relationship with the House of Stuart and found a new House of Hannover which was German and Protestant. So if you wondered why the Royal family never spoke English and had such a strong allegiance with Germany that is the reason why.

Things stayed pretty much the same until 1936, when England came perilously close to a civil war again, this time when Edward VIII challenged the constitutional law by attempting to grant himself the right to marry a twice divorced woman whose husband was still living, and was certainly no virgin
(should we mention the name Camilla here?)
.  He had no concern for the legal rights of the Monarchy.  His only concern was for himself
(should we mention the name Charles here?)
.

He attempted to grant the King (himself) all the power and authority which had hitherto belonged to Parliament.  Like King Charles I he had some formidable support; even Winston Churchill initially, but Churchill soon changed his mind when he realized the King had strong allegiances to Hitler and that his ultimate plan was to help Hitler rule Britain.  But, at the eleventh hour Edward got cold feet and decided that as much as this might be his destiny, he wasn’t sure that splitting the country in two was really the way that he wanted to be remembered.  Yes, we can say it; he didn’t have the balls, thankfully. If we can think back to a former civil war, this King lost his heart but kept his head.

He abdicated, left the country, married Wallis in France and became a deserter in the British army when the war started.  He went on the run in Europe and stayed in the houses of wealthy Nazis, until Churchill caught up with him and sent him to the Bahamas for the remainder of the war, while they closely monitored his phone calls to Germany and used him to give them false information.

In the book, ‘War of The Windsors’, authors Picknett, Prince and Prior believe that Mrs. Simpson, a twice divorced American, was the perfect scapegoat for the then British Prime Minister, Stanley Baldwin, to rid himself and England of a troublesome King who was far too interested in politics and saw his role not as a titular figurehead of Monarchy but as a man who intended to rule his country, as a ’mild dictator’ - whatever that means.  Think ‘sweet’ Tyrant, or possibly ’kind’ Despot, basically – big bunch of bullshit!  He sought to create a regime following the lines of a Mussolini or a Hitler. 

After his abdication, he travelled to Germany to meet with Himmler, Goering and Hitler himself. He was seen giving a rather ‘wobbly’ one arm salute and the Fuehrer remarked that “She [Mrs. Simpson] would have made a great Queen!”  That’s one endorsement you don’t want on the front page of ‘The Times’.

This was 1936 and at that time it was Russia that was seen as the real ‘Red’ menace, so anyone offering an alternative was considered ‘reasonable’.  In 1936, Hitler never even considered going to war with Britain; it was never part of his ‘master plan’.  There were many secret meetings with dignitaries from the Royal household: Hitler felt he would take England without a shot. 

The dictator, Mussolini would control Italy.  Franco would control Spain.  And, Hitler would occupy France and live in Paris. While the sweet, mild cuddly, little fuzzy Ol’ Dictator Teddy Eddy would rule England with his sweet little wife and all her jewelry.  We can laugh out loud at the thought of it all happening, but that man was the King, and he almost brought England to the brink of destruction.  As King George V put it “we reign, not rule” and we are certainly not a ‘mild dictator’; ‘sweet’ Tyrant; ‘kind and caring’’ despotic megalomaniac!

A popular Monarch is one who is respectful of the power of parliament and the people. Queen Elizabeth II obviously has political opinions and views but she has been on the throne for 60 years and her country is unaware of any of them, she is a politically neutral Sovereign as laid down in the constitution.

Not so Chucky, the dissident Prince.  According to a former Royal advisor, Mark Boland, Chucky sees his role as ‘opposing government policies’.  He bombards ministers with letters and missives on matters of government.  Chuckey’s numerous notes are known in government circles as ‘Black spider memos’ because they are all handwritten with big exclamation marks and underlined words! Maybe ‘Black Spider memos’ need to go down a ‘Black spider-hole?’ 

Ministers consider him insane
,
a loon and a time waster
(we knew that, we just look at his new Bride)
.

It has been suggested that if he wants to have opinions about politics then he is welcome to abdicate and become a regular citizen, man of the people, and then he can do what he likes. As a King, if he continued in this vein, he could collapse the Monarchy.

When Edward VIII insisted that he marry Mrs. Simpson against the recommendations of his Royal advisors, his government and ministers they were told that the subject of Mrs. Simpson was ‘Not Negotiable’.  He was told by the Prime Minister, Stanley Baldwin
, “In the Choice of a Queen, the voice of the people must be heard.” 
How true!  All the big papers of the day – ‘The Times’, ‘The Sunday Times’, ‘The Observer’, ‘The Telegraph’ - all came out with the same headline:
‘Abdicate!’

The people had spoken and David (Edward VIII) a man with a very nervous disposition, left!

It is a sad fact, that Edward and Mrs. Simpson almost bankrupted the current crown.  No longer King, Edward had no income, so he ‘sold’ their two castles, (which they already owned), Sandringham and Balmoral.  He took the jewelry that had been bequeathed to him by his mother, Queen Mary.  Obviously she thought that these jewels would be worn by the next Queen of England and they would stay in the family dynasty but Edward gave them to Mrs. Simpson and then lied about the amount of money he had managed to ‘squirrel’ away when he was the Prince Of Wales, and the Duke of Cornwall.  He was constantly begging for money from his brother, the King, to support his extravagant lifestyle and his wife’s jewelry.  The collection was eventually auctioned off in the 1980’s after her death and raised $62 MILLION DOLLARS.  Not bad for a couple of old people who never worked and had no money!

I think, the writer/comedian, Mel Brooks, said it best in the film ‘History of the World, Part 2’.  ‘IT’S GOOD TO BE THE KING!!!!!!!!!!!!!’

“The Truth will set you free”

(Thomas Jefferson)

OR

Did she fall or was she pushed?

For those us genuinely searching for the truth of what occurred on 31
^st
August, 1997, in the Alma Tunnel, I would like to suggest that we are obviously confused and have not been looking in the right places or asking the right questions.

It is obvious to me that we have been sent in the wrong direction and certain things which are painfully obvious to some of us seem to be painfully oblivious to the rest of us.

So if we accept certain things to be true, then the accident makes complete sense, and we have no more need to ask any more questions and we should all just shut up and sit quietly like good little children.

So let’s accept what we have been told about Diana:  ‘loose canon’, ‘paranoid’, ‘unstable’, ‘party girl’, ‘clothes horse’.  And if we apply these ‘facts’ to the ‘accident’, then the confusion you may have experienced will all seem as clear as day.

Diana got into  a car when the driver was roaring drunk, 3 x’s over the limit, because she was a party girl and she thought that driving with someone who stunk of Pernot and could hardly stand-up, would be a riot,  Makes sense to me.

The only available car that night was a Mercedes that had been stolen 3 weeks prior and the on-board computer had been replaced, well that’s sounds perfectly normal, I’m sure things like that happen every day.

Moments before the crash, bystanders saw blinding lights in the tunnel, plus motorbikes following the car, why should we trust the word of the man in the street?  We are soo much better off trusting the word of the authorities they are so much smarter than we are. People in the street are famous for making stuff up, while authorities NEVER lie to us.

The CCTV cameras that lined the route to the crash tunnel were all switched off, well that doesn’t sound weird at all.

Within hours the tunnel was swept clean and disinfected, this is very normal as this was a crime scene and all the crucial forensic evidence was destroyed, but we know that the French are fastidious about cleanliness, so there was absolutely nothing odd about any of the above.