• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Queen issues warning over paparazzi photos

jujuman13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
4,075
Reaction score
579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Link
BBC News - Queen issues warning over paparazzi photos

She says that she and her family are entitled to have privacy in their private life.

When there is a monarch who is subsidized by the Tax Payers then that monarch has to expect that they will not be entitled to the same degree of privacy than if they were ordinary citizens.
 
Link
BBC News - Queen issues warning over paparazzi photos

She says that she and her family are entitled to have privacy in their private life.

When there is a monarch who is subsidized by the Tax Payers then that monarch has to expect that they will not be entitled to the same degree of privacy than if they were ordinary citizens.

Their money comes from real estate investments, not the taxpayers
 
Link
BBC News - Queen issues warning over paparazzi photos

She says that she and her family are entitled to have privacy in their private life.

When there is a monarch who is subsidized by the Tax Payers then that monarch has to expect that they will not be entitled to the same degree of privacy than if they were ordinary citizens.

I think paparazzi are nothing more than legalized stalkers. I think the notion of a country being ruled by a inbreeder is ludicrous even if that inbreeder is nothing more than a Dave Thomas(founder of Wendy's who sold the Wendy's burger chain but still acts as a massot or spokes person for Wendy's)That said even she is entitled to privacy. But then a again I have wonder what her opinion of video cameras monitoring what the public does. Seems to me that if she doesn't mind citizens(or are they subjects) being spied on then she has no room to bitch about privacy thus deserves the same treatment as everybody else.
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't feel all that bad for her. What else is she around for these days other than to be the center focus of attention for her nation- she surely isn't a head of state. No different than hollywood celebrities in america, their job is to be seen and admired inordinately by hordes of followers with nothing else to do.

What's really ironic...

I remember walking out of the building where the crown jewels were on display--star of africa diamond, golden bathtub, etc-- and right next to the door there was a donation box...
 
I think paparazzi are nothing more than legalized stalkers. I think the notion of a country being ruled by a inbreeder is ludicrous even if that inbreeder is nothing more than a Dave Thomas(founder of Wendy's who sold the Wendy's burger chain but still acts as a massot or spokes person for Wendy's)That said even she is entitled to privacy. But then a again I have wonder what her opinion of video cameras monitoring what the public does. Seems to me that if she doesn't mind citizens(or are they subjects) being spied on then she has no room to bitch about privacy thus deserves the same treatment as everybody else.


What does Dave Thomas have to do with paparazzi? He died a few years back anyways.
 
I think paparazzi are nothing more than legalized stalkers. I think the notion of a country being ruled by a inbreeder is ludicrous even if that inbreeder is nothing more than a Dave Thomas(founder of Wendy's who sold the Wendy's burger chain but still acts as a massot or spokes person for Wendy's)That said even she is entitled to privacy. But then a again I have wonder what her opinion of video cameras monitoring what the public does. Seems to me that if she doesn't mind citizens(or are they subjects) being spied on then she has no room to bitch about privacy thus deserves the same treatment as everybody else.

Learn about British politics and the role of the Queen please.
She does 'rule' us in any sense of the word. She is merely a head of State.
 
Last edited:
Link
BBC News - Queen issues warning over paparazzi photos

She says that she and her family are entitled to have privacy in their private life.

When there is a monarch who is subsidized by the Tax Payers then that monarch has to expect that they will not be entitled to the same degree of privacy than if they were ordinary citizens.

The Queen is entitled to her own privacy, when she is performing state occassions for the UK's benefits then the media can go on her but any other time outside of her duties is her time to spend as she pleases.
 
The Queen is entitled to her own privacy, when she is performing state occassions for the UK's benefits then the media can go on her but any other time outside of her duties is her time to spend as she pleases.

What was her stand on privacy when the british government decided to set up cameras to spy on it's citizens(or subjects)?

Learn about British politics and the role of the Queen please.
She does 'rule' us in any sense of the word. She is merely a head of State.

So you Brits are ruled by a inbred hillbilly.
 
What does Dave Thomas have to do with paparazzi? He died a few years back anyways.


Spokesperson/mascot/figurehead which is what I assume that the Queen of England is.
 
Learn about British politics and the role of the Queen please.
She does 'rule' us in any sense of the word. She is merely a head of State.

How does she "rule?"

Can she declare war? What about raise/lower taxes? Does she have any real say whatsoever in these matters or any other matter of national importance for that matter?
 
I love brit's. They are our allies. They are our friends. We are tied at the hip as far as I'm concerned. If they want to preserve their heritage and history by prolonging the monarchy it is entirely their business.

But I think the very idea of the Queen, King, etc., in this day and age is as silly as Benny Hill. If it we're me, I'd tell the Queen and her family to "Get a job. Get a check." Their farts don't smell any better than anyone elses. :rofl

So, please pardon this Yank if I sport a smirk when I see the royalty on TV, in the tabloids, etc. It's just all so rediculous to me. But I'll try to be polite about it.
 
Last edited:
Learn about British politics and the role of the Queen please.
She does 'rule' us in any sense of the word. She is merely a head of State.

Maybe you need to go and learn some fact about what the Queen/King actual can and can't do before you make any post.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you need tyo go and learn some fact about what the Queen/King actual can and can't do before you make any post.

I'm thinkin' typos are at play here. Methinks she might have meant "doesn't" instead of "does" but I don't mean to put words into her mouth. I think she just had a typo. Otherwise her post makes absolutely no sense.
 
No, but we are occasionally criticised by them.

That was funny right there.

larry_the_cable_guy.jpg


Are you sure you're British? :rofl
 
Last edited:
The British have a great sense of humour.

Yep. You're British all right.

Howdy Cuz! :2wave:



Ooooops.... my bad. Thought Manc Skipper posted that.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom