Queen deliberately died in Scotland".
I mean what are the odds...
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Stuff
Operation London Bridge now Operation Unicorn
(135 posts)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
@Yodhrin The little posh entitled dude clearly had broken the law, if breach of the peace is defined as "conduct severe enough to cause alarm to ordinary people and threaten serious disturbance to the community" (your quote).
The ordinary people were alarmed enough to begin to remove him from the situation, and if the police hadn't arrested him a 'serious disturbance to the community' was about to happen. Seeing as he was the cause of the disturbance, it was justafiable to remove him, though as stated about he may have learned a few important life lessons if the Police hadn't intervened.
Just for the record, she wasn't my Queen, and Charles isn't my King, just incase you think I am some sort of Royalist. I also somewhat agree with the entitled dudes views, however voicing them at someones funeral is always going to end badly for them.
Imagine some twat, shouting at the back of your mums funeral cos of some of some disagreement they'd had in the past. Would you think ah, fair enough, or go and have words with them?
Posted 1 year ago # -
“I mean what are the odds...”
About 1 in 4, based on time spent here each year.
Interesting (in a way) is that her decline was obvious enough - ‘not well enough to travel to London to sanction change of PM’ - but not sufficient to consider travelling south ‘just in case’
So either actual death was very unexpected OR maybe she wanted to die at Balmoral?
Re previous post ‘Sturgeon livid as it’s end of Indy hopes’, I doubt that’s true of NS, even less sure about implication.
The future of the UK and the future of the monarchy are interlinked, but that’s not the same as interdependent.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Maybe she chose to die here because it's a nicer place to have your final days. I wouldn't want to spend my last hours in a massive metropolis.
Posted 1 year ago # -
If I was on holiday I'd have made that pair of <rule 2> come to me as well regardless how fit I was!
Posted 1 year ago # -
There is that!
But the spin was that she was really sorry to have inconvenienced them…
Posted 1 year ago # -
I wonder they didn't drive the cortege to London and give a load more people the chance of viewing it instead of putting the coffin on an aeroplane.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I might "go have words with them" @Baldcyclist but I can't imagine I'd call the cops to have them arrested?
Posted 1 year ago # -
"but I can't imagine I'd call the cops to have them arrested?"
Imagine the police were already there?
Another analogy, you know those 'mad for it in Newcastle (or where ever) programmes on ch5.
There's always a mouthly lad that gets lifted before they can cause any trouble, this is just the same but without alchohol.
No one would question whether the mouthy lad should be arrested in the mad for it programme. Not sure why mouthing off in another context makes it ok, and less arrestible.
Posted 1 year ago # -
But it’s still about the sliding scale -
Warn – remove – arrest – CHARGE
Posted 1 year ago # -
I don't think we know if he's been charged or not. We do know he was arrested.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Ok
Some have, maybe not that one.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Imagine some twat, shouting at the back of your mums funeral cos of some of some disagreement they'd had in the past. Would you think ah, fair enough, or go and have words with them?
Getting pretty sick of hearing this line of argument for anything - "imagine it was your relative's funeral" etc. No, I simply cannot imagine that, because I have no relatives whose coffin would close streets for days on end. I have no relatives who held themselves to be God's representative on Earth and intrinsically superior to all other citizens of the UK. I have no relatives who are paid millions of pounds from the state every year for simply existing, or who spent their life ensuring that their death would immediately trigger one of the most significant unelected transitions of state power this century.
The Royals themselves hold themselves to be intrinsically different from everyone else, so attempting to make everyday equivalences is simply absurd. There is literally no comparison to this procession and any other resident of the UK's funeral. It wasn't even a funeral! It was as much a political event as a funereal one.
It's actually quite common that deaths in more conventional families result in one party trying to maintain or create status quos on the sly while others grieve - cementing residency arrangements, pinching items out of the deceased's home, quibbling over wills etc. The polite thing to do is to leave decisions over these sorts of things until after the funeral where possible.
If the royals didn't want Elizabeth's death to be "excessively politicised" - as if the death of a hereditary head of state can ever not be political - then they could have delayed the political ceremonies of succession till after the funeral, and they could have avoided the political decision to attempt to rehabilitate Andrew by involving him in public duties. They chose to make these political decisions and it is entirely legitimate for others to make political objections to those decisions at their points of manifestation.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@Jonty, it's actually quite a simple thought experiment to seperate the two.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@Yodhrin - I think we have been over what I consider legitimate protest before. I'll just say that I have directly buttonholed the First Minister while on a picket line. I mean, debating on CCE is fun and all, but I put my money where my mouth is.
Also - no-one has been a "subject" since 1 January 1983. (British Nationality Act 1981)
Posted 1 year ago # -
I doubt that we'd even be talking about this protest if the enthusiastic Loyalist types (judging by the questionable tattoos sported by one of them) had not decided to batter the protester, thus precipitating the arrest.
Spectacular own goal from them (with a bit of an assist from the cops)
Now extensive discourse around Andrew's proclivities, the protection given to the powerful and policing overreach is front and center.
So bravo those to those thugs! The protestor couldn't have hoped for a more effective force multiplier.
Otherwise the sum total of my engagement with this circus is detouring to "admire" the queue in the Meadows. Ye gods...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Supermarket petrol stations going to be shut on Monday, planning on going hill walking on Monday with the boy weather permitting, so will need to fuel up on Sunday:
Posted 1 year ago # -
This reminded me of the notion of buffer zones, so you are still allowed to protest, just not in the vicinity of someone that could be hurt by your protest. May be a solution for a funeral procession?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62913954
Posted 1 year ago # -
surely there's a difference between protesting the powerless and often already victimised and the powerful?
Posted 1 year ago # -
ps if we were to go hillwalking, what should we walk?
Posted 1 year ago # -
“
Kuvin said he understood why people might bristle at protesters calling out Andrew during mourning activities – as happened in Edinburgh, when a man who shouted “Andrew, you’re a sick old man” was detained by police – but recognized why it might happen.“
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/15/jeffrey-epstein-prince-andrew-queen-death
Posted 1 year ago # -
@SRd during World Cup finals you get The five peaks in the Pentlands to yourself. I also had Arthur’s seat to myself at the Diana funeral.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@SRD we did the 3 peaks from Balerno last weekend, boy has progressed well from 3 miles (Binn hill), to 5.5 miles (West Lomond hill), and then the 7.5 miles for the Pentlands walk.
So we're now aiming for his first Munro, I think maybe Carn Oasda and The Cairnwell, as they start high from the Glenshee ski centre, or maybe Ben Chonzie, as I think those are conquerable by a 7 year old.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@SRD I think the protest's are aimed at mostly rich private institutions and not the people attending them, though the consequence is of course personal hurt for patients who are already in distress (my wife's work has protestors outside most days including days where there are no procedures).
The wider point of course is which protest's have a right to take place and which we should cancel? The ones which we feel aligned to, or have sympathy for a point of view, or allow all but ensure sensitivity to individuals. ie the time and place is important.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@baldcyclist agree the Glenshee tops are good ones for kids. I think mine were 8 and 4 when we did them.
from an outsiders perspective, it's always seemed to me that protests were aimed at the patients, perhaps that's different here to the US where many providers are charitable institutions. and in Glasgow aren't they targeting Queen Elizabeth University Hospital?
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
