Peter of England and WeaRe not a Bank

[Chaos]

UK ROYALS PREPARE TO ABDICATE - Operation Candid Repurposed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMBGmFqln5o

The UK Press is currently rife with scenarios whereby the British Royals, due to threat of Civil disobedience on behalf of the BREXIT betrayed citizenry , must be removed to a "safe-haven" to protect them from their subjects. Hmmm! I believe they know the game is up and are covering their tracks as best the can and using this as an excuse to leave OR more possibly they have been told their days are numbered. I think that this number. could be the No.17

This guy just cannot help himself and it appears he is still still pushing the WeRe bank with freeman legal services.

ReMovement
http://www.removement.net

Rules for Radicals
http://www.rules4radicals.org

BREXIT
http://www.brexit2exit.org

WeRe Bank
https://www.werebank.co.uk

Freeman Legal Services Website:
http://www.freemanlegalservices.com/

Mod note...I've moved this post/topic to the previous PofE thread to avoid clutter...Gregg

all he has to do is wave his magic key fob and everything will be alright.

[longdog]

Even an ardent republican like me doesn't hold Liz personally responsible for the cluster-fuck that is Brexit. Or any other political fuck-up come to that.

She doesn't have any real power to change anything and if there was the political will, which there isn't, she'd be the old lady formerly known as Elizabeth R by lunchtime tomorrow. It wouldn't be the first time parliament had kicked out a reigning monarch.

[Burnaby49]

Even an ardent republican like me doesn't hold Liz personally responsible for the cluster-fuck that is Brexit. Or any other political fuck-up come to that.

She doesn't have any real power to change anything and if there was the political will, which there isn't, she'd be the old lady formerly known as Elizabeth R by lunchtime tomorrow. It wouldn't be the first time parliament had kicked out a reigning monarch.

I think, in recognition of her long service, they'd give her the toss with a little less drama than Charles I or James II. Her strongest ace in the hole for being allowed to stay on the job is that, currently, her heir apparent is her son Charles. I'm guessing that a significant portion of the UK is hoping that she stays on the job long enough to outlive him. She's my monarch too and that's certainly the outcome I'm rooting for.

[Gregg]

Charles will be fine. I find a lot of parallels between him and Edward VII, another long serving Prince of Wales that a lot of people thought was a disaster waiting to happen but turned out to be pretty good, as modern Kings go. For what its worth, Victoria had some actual power, and Edward did a good bit towards reforming the House of Lords when they tried to block a budget thing by promising to appoint as many new Lords as it took to reform Parliament. Probably the last time a British Monarch acting politically out in the open.

For what its worth, the whole family seems to have some pretty good genes for living a long time. Granny Queen lived to about 100, Lizzy is over 90 and looks pretty spry still as does The Duke of Edinburgh who is also pushing 100. They're good for tourism and overall the represent the Commonwealth well. Charles is also keen to modernize the Monarchy and streamline it, with an eye towards cutting the costs I think.

Count your blessings, you could do a lot worse for Head of State.

[grixit]

Why does he think they're abdicating just because there are contingency plans to get out of London during potential unrest?

Yes, yes, yes, but first, I'm sure they have plans for any number of unlikely circumstances because that's what governments do. Second, one of the things about the Monarch who 'reigns but does not rule' is they are somewhat insulated from being responsible for what the government does. I'd be much more worried about someone trying to hang Teresa May from Nelson's Column, she's got a lot more to answer for in this shitshow.

I kind of feel sorry for May. She didn't want the job but was persuaded to do it because she seemed the closest candidate they had to someone who actually understood the issue. And of course, ever since, she's been getting sniped at from all sides for everything she does or doesn't do. After the deadline passes, i hope she gets to just lock herself in at Chequers with a hot bath and no media.

[The Seventh String]

Probably the last time a British Monarch acting politically out in the open.

I think that better describes a later king who didn’t last long enough to have a coronation, Edward VIII. Who was carefully slid out of the job, retitled the Dule of Windsor and packed off to the West Indies well out of the way with firm instructions not to darken Buck House doorways any time soon. The reason given in the popular media was that he wanted to marry an American divorcee, and that just wasn’t right or proper, what with the King being the head of the Church of England and all that.

On the other hand, it may well have been that his openly displayed admiration and liking for a certain Austrian who having failed as a painter found success - for a time, anyway - as a German politician and murderous demagogue was of far more concern in 1938 than Edward’s marital indiscretions.

[Burnaby49]

Can't say I agree with that. There was nobody, anywhere, more hostile to the Nazis than Winston Churchill and he badly wanted Edward to stay on the throne to the point he damaged his own political career promoting Edward's retention;

https://www.quora.com/Who-was-Churchill ... -George-VI

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews ... ation.html

While divorce is barely a consideration nowadays it was a very big deal in the 1930's, particularly since the British monarch was head of the Church of England which opposed divorce. Edward was popular but not popular enough to get a pass on marrying a divorced woman. He might have been able to struggle through but he wasn't interested in making the effort and pictures like this didn't help his case;

[grixit]

While divorce is barely a consideration nowadays it was a very big deal in the 1930's, particularly since the British monarch was head of the Church of England which opposed divorce.

How did the Church of England get started again?

[Gregg]

I think, I'm not sure, but I think Henry VIII declared his marriage to Katherine of Aragon Annulled, as opposed to calling it a divorce.

I checked, I appear to be more or less right...

Henry, at the time a Roman Catholic, sought the Pope's approval for an annulment on the grounds that his marriage was invalid because Katherine had first been his brother's wife, using a passage from the Old Testament (Leviticus Chapter 20 Verse 21) to justify his stance: "If a man shall take his brother’s wife, it is an impurity; he hath uncovered his brother’s nakedness; they shall be childless.” Henry had begun an affair with Anne Boleyn, who is said[by whom?] to have refused to become his mistress (Henry had already consummated an affair then dismissed Anne's sister, Mary Boleyn, and most historians believe that Anne wanted to avoid the same treatment)[citation needed]. Despite the pope's refusal, Henry separated from Katherine in 1531. In the face of the Pope's continuing refusal to annul his marriage to Katherine, Henry ordered the highest church official in England, Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, to convene a court to rule on the status of his marriage to Katherine. On 23 May 1533,[4] Cranmer ruled the marriage to Katherine null and void. On 28 May 1533, he pronounced the King legally married to Anne (with whom Henry had already secretly exchanged wedding vows, probably in late January 1533). This led to the break from the Roman Catholic Church and the later establishment of the Church of England.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wives_of_ ... _of_Aragon

[hucknallred]

How can I put this... he's dumped the yellow vest & crossed the atlantic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZKUKVmhoHc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx4qBJxmA2c

[Siegfried Shrink]

Please weigh in with appropriate comments on his vids

[Gregg]

With all due respect, STFU about our country, your views on your own are phucked up enough.

[Gregg]

Won't let me comment, I must be blocked.

[NYGman]

Is he actually in California, if so how did he get in to the US without a passport? I thought he didn't have a UK Passport. It looks quite hot where he is filming? If he is in the US, should he not be Re-Moved? Amazing how he has been plugging at his bank for years, he even brags about never going to court and still being around. Now he has latched on to the Pro-Trump, hit list. Apparently Trump is partnering with Peter and the DOD to distribute money, or at least that is what I think he is trying to claim. If he is in the US, and is promoting this stuff, I think no arrest days are over... Here is hoping.

[hucknallred]

Is he actually in California, if so how did he get in to the US without a passport? I thought he didn't have a UK Passport. It looks quite hot where he is filming?

If he ever said he had no passport it must have been BS. The UK is not in the Schengen Area so he coulndn't have gone to Germany & France without one.
You can only go from the UK to Ireland without a passport.

Presuming he got there on an ESTA so must have a pretty clean background.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Presuming he got there on an ESTA so must have a pretty clean background.

Not necessarily so. The ESTA questions changed about 3 years ago. Previously they asked about any offences involving "moral turpitude". This was a catch all that would cover most offences including fraud. However, apart from the "are you a terrorist?" the questions now ask directly whether you have been convicted of serious damage to property or to the person or have been convicted of drugs offences.

A response to an FOI request said: "The United States authorities do not have routine access to criminal record information held on the Police National Computer, the Criminal History System (in Scotland) or the Northern Ireland Criminal Record. The United States authorities are able to seek details of any criminal convictions held on the Police National Computer on an individual request basis through Interpol channels."

So unless he's come up on an intelligence watch list because of his subversive activities he's likely to be there on the VISA Waiver Scheme.

[Siegfried Shrink]

I think it fair to say that his subversive activities would be considered unthreatening by a local tennis club, let alone any government. Apart from North Korea, possibly.

[Comrade Sharik]

Previously they asked about any offences involving "moral turpitude". This was a catch all that would cover most offences including fraud. However, apart from the "are you a terrorist?"

I can state from personal experience, that it was possible to lie through your teeth on the 'moral turpitude' question and still get into the states. Presumably being a respectable looking white person helped.

[Jeffrey]

This could be the case we need for 2019, Pete does something stupid in the states, gets himself locked up and sentenced by our more punitive justice system.

[Mike_p]

Is he actually in California?

Looks like he's in France: in one of the recent videos he's shown standing in front of a branch of Credit Agricole.
AFAIK there are only three branches in the US and none with cash machines outside.