Prince Charles... probably been reading PH
Discussion
www.thisislondon.co.uk/dynamic/news/story.html?in_review_id=705722&in_review_text_id=679518
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2280564.stm
Long story short, Charlie has been writing scathing missives to people in high political office in Britain.
I'll quote selectively, but you'll see what I mean..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2280564.stm
Long story short, Charlie has been writing scathing missives to people in high political office in Britain.
I'll quote selectively, but you'll see what I mean..
quote:
"I and countless others dread the very real and growing prospect of an American-style personal injury 'culture' becoming ever more prevalent in this country," he was said to have written.
"Such a culture can only lead ultimately, to... an atmosphere of distrust and suspicion, let alone the real fear of taking decisions that might lead to legal action."
quote:
He also complained about "the degree to which our lives are becoming ruled by a truly absurd degree of politically correct interference", giving the example of horse chestnut trees being felled in Norwich last year over fears that falling conkers could injure passers-by.
quote:
And in August he urged Downing Street to do more to help British citizens in Zimbabwe.
quote:Now, I'm not interested in Pro/Anti-monarchy, or the constitutional issues here, but I know full well that what I'm seeing is an undeniably influential man, exerting an opinion in line with my own. He's not an uncaring, racist, facist or avaricious man, he's just stopped talking to his rhodedendrons and got some common sense. And he's slapping Billy Liar about the chops, so it works for me.
The Prince says litigation is potentially threatening the training of soldiers, with safety precautions restricting the use of live-firing exercises and even the use of barbed wire in case someone gets hurt and sues.
He highlights the case of a surviving member of a two-man aircraft which had crashed, facing the possibility of a manslaughter charge. "Why should any other pilot in that squadron, knowing there is a risk of litigation if he gets it wrong, take any calculated risk, exercise his professional judgment, push himself to the limits or fly in marginal weather?" he asks.
And although it wasn't reproduced in the web article, he was quoted on C4 news as saying that the ECHR is too focused on individual rights without reference to responsibilitry and consideration of the broader social fabric which it is effectively destroying.
Edit: Here it is...
www.channel4.com/news/home/z/stories/20020925/prince.html
>> Edited by CarZee on Wednesday 25th September 20:33
Edit: Here it is...
www.channel4.com/news/home/z/stories/20020925/prince.html
quote:
"The Human Rights Act is only about the rights of individuals. This betrays a fundamental distortion in social and legal thinking."
"The quality of residents' lives is impoverished by our inability to keep rules in proportion and to see the wider consequences of our actions."
>> Edited by CarZee on Wednesday 25th September 20:33
Thank you very much for your support Sire CarZee!
I noticed it is not your custom to wear these imperialistic headdresses.
That is, what I understand an upright Briton!
Keep it up!
As for the our young continental friend Bodo, I have to admit that I used to have the balls in polo sports. Well recognized, bourgeoise contemporary.
cheers,
ye olde Princy Charly
I noticed it is not your custom to wear these imperialistic headdresses.
That is, what I understand an upright Briton!
Keep it up!
As for the our young continental friend Bodo, I have to admit that I used to have the balls in polo sports. Well recognized, bourgeoise contemporary.
cheers,
ye olde Princy Charly
I like the fact that he is being told to stay out of politics. Surely any healthy democracy should be able to incorporate many perspectives as this surely validates and enriches the whole process.
Can only politicians be allowed to discuss politics then? Are normal people only allowed to discuss politics because there is no mass exposure of what we say?
Following this logic, Bob Geldof should stay out of politics, and big brother contestants, and U2, and Private Eye. Can't have people being swayed by the rounded and thought out opinions of non-politicians. You're not allowed.
Please follow the clearly marked signs labelled "This way for Police State". Thankyou for behaving yourselves..
Can only politicians be allowed to discuss politics then? Are normal people only allowed to discuss politics because there is no mass exposure of what we say?
Following this logic, Bob Geldof should stay out of politics, and big brother contestants, and U2, and Private Eye. Can't have people being swayed by the rounded and thought out opinions of non-politicians. You're not allowed.
Please follow the clearly marked signs labelled "This way for Police State". Thankyou for behaving yourselves..
Interestingly I was yelling at the TV last night whilst the Mrs slowly sank into the sofa in embarrassment glad that no-one could see me and between hurling my indoor footwear at aforementioned device and screaming libellous comments at Government officials appearing on it I caught up with our future King's opinions.
Now I'm no royalist but...he's more in tune with what I think than any of the witless oafs who got elected...
Now I'm no royalist but...he's more in tune with what I think than any of the witless oafs who got elected...
Yes, but you've now to consider why the article that Charlie penned (and correctly in my view) was leaked, and who leaked it.
Doubtless in these cases there is someone seeking to gain from the scenario.
It could be a slur against the government, intended to deliver a timely slap to bLair and his cronies from the well oiled machinery of Whitehall. As this is being populated with an increasing number of bLairites it's an interesting insight into the internal politics.
It could be a slur against the monarchy by the government who are tired of Charlie sticking his beak into affairs which, by our constitutional monarchistic legislation should not be interfering with. Public opinion will probably go with Charlie on this, and so it's likely to be a backfire if this is the intent. Charlie is very independent, and probably taking full advantage of the fact that when/if he becomes king he will have no option but to keep quiet. Perhaps this is the very point theat will see the crown pass over him to William? Time will tell.
Either way, it's an interesting window into the murky relationship between Whitehall and St James' Palace. These type of leaks never happen 'by mistake'.
Edited for typos
>> Edited by smifffy on Thursday 26th September 10:26
Doubtless in these cases there is someone seeking to gain from the scenario.
It could be a slur against the government, intended to deliver a timely slap to bLair and his cronies from the well oiled machinery of Whitehall. As this is being populated with an increasing number of bLairites it's an interesting insight into the internal politics.
It could be a slur against the monarchy by the government who are tired of Charlie sticking his beak into affairs which, by our constitutional monarchistic legislation should not be interfering with. Public opinion will probably go with Charlie on this, and so it's likely to be a backfire if this is the intent. Charlie is very independent, and probably taking full advantage of the fact that when/if he becomes king he will have no option but to keep quiet. Perhaps this is the very point theat will see the crown pass over him to William? Time will tell.
Either way, it's an interesting window into the murky relationship between Whitehall and St James' Palace. These type of leaks never happen 'by mistake'.
Edited for typos
>> Edited by smifffy on Thursday 26th September 10:26
I think the fact that he voiced his opinions is of small concern, as I believe he is entitled to write to any MP as can anyone else in the UK.
The real question in any so-called “leak” is who is to benefit any why?
From what I have read, his letter was written over a month ago and yet it appeared in the papers at a time when London’s transport system is in crisis, Wembley stadium is to be built (at vast public expense) and there is so much debate on the war on Iraq.
Is this a coincidence, or is it just me?
The real question in any so-called “leak” is who is to benefit any why?
From what I have read, his letter was written over a month ago and yet it appeared in the papers at a time when London’s transport system is in crisis, Wembley stadium is to be built (at vast public expense) and there is so much debate on the war on Iraq.
Is this a coincidence, or is it just me?
Speed Matters | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff