cont'd ...

Dear Belly,

I've read some of the posters who claim that we owe so
much to Britain for having survived so well over these
past 112 years. Really? Is that actually true?
Or did we actually function on our own despite Britain?
And do we really need a de facto head of state? In the
past it used to be cheaper to buy Australian wool products
in Britain than it was here. We used to support them in
so many ways - did they really support us during our
times of crisis? Perhaps we should study our history a bit
more and see who really owes what to whom?

Those who speak of a republic are committing treason and shell be sent to the tower, from where their heads shall be so removed from their bodies, by the axe.

QUEEN ELIZABETH I

Boy oh boy, those b's talking about a republic, Oh! how I wish for the "good old days."

QUEEN ELIZABETH II

Yes Lexi, I except the English as cousins, but never rulers.
To be honest, no one in my family will admit it, but we came via convict ships, in our case.
Bit harsh saying the Brits dumped us in joining the EU actual it would have been insanity if they had not.
And this country opened its doors as a result, a positive out come.
Popularity of Royalty *the firm* in HRH own words, is up and down.
The lack of early respect at Lady D's death was a low.
Read the body language, it is there to be seen, in all of us.
HM Lix showed extreme displeasure at the singing of the Royal Hymn by a bloke standing behind her.
Often, if you look with honesty, you will see petulance and spoiled rich toff attitudes from the firm!
To day we hear Britain's tax payers, some who could not afford a party for those they love, are to pay for the whole thing, we dipped a huge amount in!
WHY.

Belly, see it this way. The whole Lizzie 2 shindig is a huge money
spinner for the British economy. London runs on tourism, and she
is part of that circus, sold to foreigners, who love it, especially
Americans.

So she is actually earning huge money for Britain.

Dear Yabby,

I agree - as I stated in my previous post -
the monarchy is the Disneyland of Britain -
and they have nothing else. But what's that
got to do with us in the 21st century.
Why do we need a head of state of a foreign
country? And as has been pointed out in the
past - making changes to our Constitution is
not as complicated as John Howard and other
monarchists have stated in the past. In actual
fact there's just a few minor things that need
to be changed and they won't have any disastrous
results. Poor old Howard did his best to get a
knighthood - but ended up with a medal instead.
Apparently he wasn't considered to be of the
right calibre - as Sir Robert Menzies was.
I guess it should tell us something that
knighthoods seem to be conferred with greater
ease on British celebrities.

*Why do we need a head of state of a foreign
country?*

Well we don't Lexi and she's really only a figurehead.
I think it will all change once Lizzie 2 falls off her perch,
which is probably not that far off. That will be a good time
to bring in the changes, as oldies like Howard and other old
monarchists will be doing the same.

Sometimes timing matters.