Basra, the royal baby (Harry & Meghan's) is born.

[AussieHustler]

The royal baby is a boy. I predict his full-name to be Mandela Arthur Albert David.

https://edition.cnn.com/uk/live-news/royal-baby-2019-gbr-intl/index.html

 

[Basra]

omg Aussie i almost had a heart attack when i read your title. looool;


I cant believe she gave him a boy!~ wow. Mashalaah The media are going crazy now lol

 

[Daughter of samaale]

omg Aussie i almost had a heart attack when i read your title. looool;


I cant believe she gave him a boy!~ wow. Mashalaah The media are going crazy now lol

Mashallah*

 

[Basra]

The royal baby is a boy. I predict his full-name to be Mandela Arthur Albert David.

https://edition.cnn.com/uk/live-news/royal-baby-2019-gbr-intl/index.html

No Mandela name PLEASE GOD!!!! I choose the name of Spencer or FitzHenry lol



PS I think i also predicted it was going to be a boy!

 

[Emily]

Great! Now she can rest her hand

 

[Apollo]

I hate royal families. They should be abolished wherever they are still left.

France was lucky that they beheaded their royals. Viva La Revolution.

 

[halwa]

I was just thinking about you! @Basra

 

[Basra]

I was just thinking about you! @Basra

thank you for thinking of me! I just got the new from this thread walaahi,. didnt have time to watch the tele today, rushed out of home with my mom minivan

 

[CaliTedesse]

I hate royal families. They should be abolished wherever they are still left.

France was lucky that they beheaded their royals. Viva La Revolution.

kill all royals in Somalia???

Only the Darods have a king from what I recall. But many subclans secretly don't view him as their king.

No most clans hold kings. http://justanotheramericanprincess.blogspot.com/p/about-being-married-to-muslim-somali.html

 

[The alchemist]

I hate royal families. They should be abolished wherever they are still left.

France was lucky that they beheaded their royals. Viva La Revolution.

I once said the same shit on Youtube some time ago, and the dumb Brits went apeshit on me. I don't understand royal families, they represent all the bad shit, like class and all that. So archaic. The Royal family are only priveledged superrich white people who live at the expense of others.

If you read the biography of that family, every person seems to have been studying at the best ivy-League schools. They appoint themselves to top military ranks and medals that they've not earned, belittling the ones who've made real efforts and sacrifices to reach those positions.

The ones supporting this would claim it's a purely constitutional tradition, but it is more than that. It is a real political force, with an impact on social, political and economic life.

I don't care whether they behead all the royal family or keep the tradition a thousand years more. In my opinion, this is nothing but white people holding on to their past glory and domination.

 

[roble]

the british royal family is unlike any otha, the longest monarch from 1060,the most powerful in history and the most successful making the english the mightiest,most prosperous and most educated ethnic group on earth, giving thm
usa,canada,australia,nzland along with the largest number of colonies and making english the lingua franca.

they been controlling the world just ova 500yrs now.thats where the industrial revolution began, the likes of isaac newton,,created the greenwich meantime, air and shipping routes the world still uses today and much more.
the British descent run the world and rest of the whites take a back seat.
More than good reason to preserve their kingdom, it gave thm continuity for nearly a 1000yrs.

 

[AussieHustler]

I don't like monarchism, I'm a staunch republican supporter and would like to see Australia becoming a republic with our own head of state. I see modern monarchists as parasites and the biggest recipients of welfare. However, the British royal family plays two major important for the English people.

1) Tourism, the Royal family is seen as Brand Britain and tourists spend billions of dollars to visit their palaces and castles each year.

And what financial benefits do the royals bring?
VisitBritain reckons that tourism linked to royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle adds up to 2.7 million visitors a year. And a consultancy called Brand Finance estimated in 2017 that the monarchy’s annual contribution to the UK economy to be around £1.8bn a year, drawing in an additional £550m of tourism revenues a year, and an increase in trade, from the Royal Family acting as ambassadors, supposedly worth £150m a year.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...fits-cost-meghan-markle-expense-a8345436.html


2) They create cohesion among the British and in particular the English people.

Royal baby’s important role to promote social and national cohesion.

Read more at https://thejupital.com/royal-babys-...al-and-national-cohesion/#kqeV51tRYYfikopz.99

Somalia would've been a better place if we had a monarchy that people would listen and give their loyalty to than tribal elders bereft of any ideas in promoting cohesiveness and peace for all.

 

[AussieHustler]

@Basra

I got another prediction for you. Michele Obama will be asked to become the godmother of little Mandela and I won’t be surprised if Barack Obama is asked to be his godfather.

 

[Tukraq]

I don't like monarchism, I'm a staunch republic and would like to see Australia becoming a republic with our own head of state. I see modern monarchists as parasites and the biggest recipients of welfare. However, the British royal family plays two major important for the English people.

1) Tourism, the Royal family is seen as Brand Britain and tourists spend billions of dollars to visit their palaces and castles each year.

And what financial benefits do the royals bring?
VisitBritain reckons that tourism linked to royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle adds up to 2.7 million visitors a year. And a consultancy called Brand Finance estimated in 2017 that the monarchy’s annual contribution to the UK economy to be around £1.8bn a year, drawing in an additional £550m of tourism revenues a year, and an increase in trade, from the Royal Family acting as ambassadors, supposedly worth £150m a year.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...fits-cost-meghan-markle-expense-a8345436.html


2) They create cohesion among the British and in particular the English people.

Royal baby’s important role to promote social and national cohesion.

Read more at https://thejupital.com/royal-babys-...al-and-national-cohesion/#kqeV51tRYYfikopz.99

Somalia would've been a better place if we had a monarchy that people would listen and give their loyalty to than tribal elders bereft of any ideas in promoting cohesiveness and peace for all.

the queen will always be the head of state of her former colony Australia, however are you suggesting Somalia have Burhaan be the head of state I personally disagree even though he's a noble MJ, we should take the US model where the president is both the head of state and government,
not the outdated European model

 

[AussieHustler]

the queen will always be the head of state of her former colony Australia, however are you suggesting Somalia have Burhaan be the head of state I personally disagree even though he's a noble MJ, we should take the US model where the president is both the head of state and government,
not the outdated European model

@Tukraq

In Australia, there’s an unwritten convention that the reign of the British monarchy in Australia ends with the current queen. After her death, Australia will hold a plebiscite to decide what form of republic we would choose. The American, French or the Indian model.

As for the analogy of Somalia and a monarchy, you never cease to remind me the Confucius quote of, “When a wise man points at the moon, the idiot looks at his finger”.

 

[Tukraq]

@Tukraq

In Australia, there’s an unwritten convention that the reign of the British monarchy in Australia ends with the current queen. After her death, Australia will hold a plebiscite to decide what form of republic we would choose. The American, French or the Indian model.

As for the analogy of Somalia and a monarchy, you never cease to remind me the Confucius quote of, “When a wise man points at the moon, the idiot looks at his finger”.

what moon are you talking about, the whole reasoning behind kings is tradition and history, you not just going to make a king out of scratch lol, we as a nation have only one king but I don't think he deserves any ceremonial powers even though he's my cousin, but I guess I'm the idiot

 

[AussieHustler]

what moon are you talking about, the whole reasoning behind kings is tradition and history, you not just going to make a king out of scratch lol, we as a nation have only one king but I don't think he deserves any ceremonial powers even though he's my cousin, but I guess I'm the idiot

@Tukraq

Let me simplify it for you Sxb. I was speaking in the hypothetical past tense. If they had & not creating a new one. Now, go and argue with Eeddo @Basra

 

[Aaegal]

I don't like monarchism, I'm a staunch republic and would like to see Australia becoming a republic with our own head of state.

You want Australia to be a republic like USA or a parliamentary republic like Germany/other EU countries?

 

[AussieHustler]

f cohabitation

You want Australia to be a republic like USA or a parliamentary republic like Germany/other EU countries?

@Aaegal

The American directly elected president Republican model appeals to me because once you elect a president h/she will be expected to be at the helm (bar death, mental and physical incapacitation and impeachment) for the duration of h/her presidency. Meanwhile, the parliamentary model is politically unstable because a sitting prime minister can easily be deposed by the members of parliament of h/her own party like it happened here several times in the last decade. Having said that, the French model of cohabitation where the president and prime minister from opposing parties are expected to work together for the benefit of the nation has merits too. A bipartisanship politics of finding a common ground via compromise promotes inclusivity.

 

[Basra]

f cohabitation

@Aaegal

The American directly elected president Republican model appeals to me because once you elect a president h/she will be expected to be at helm (bar death, mental and physical incapacitation and impeachment) for the duration of h/her presidency. Meanwhile, the parliamentary model is politically unstable because a sitting prime minister can easily be deposed by the members of parliament of h/her own party like it happened here several times in the last decade. Having said that, the French model of cohabitation where the president and prime minister from opposing parties are expected to work together for the benefit of the nation has merits too. A bipartisanship politics of finding a common ground via compromise promotes inclusivity.

Yess....inclusivity. U r the king of that epithet!