Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
lizarraba

The King of Spain talks.

Recommended Posts

In 60 minutes (9:00 PM hour of Spain) the King of Spain, Felipe VI, will make a televised speech. 

The King only make televised speeches in Christmas, and the only times that havent been in Christmas was in 1981 in the failed attemp of coup, in the terrorist atack of the 11-M and in the announcement of the abdication of Juan Carlos I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lizarraba said:

In 60 minutes (9:00 PM hour of Spain) the King of Spain, Felipe VI, will make a televised speech. 

The King only make televised speeches in Christmas, and the only times that havent been in Christmas was in 1981 in the failed attemp of coup, in the terrorist atack of the 11-M and in the announcement of the abdication of Juan Carlos I.

I don't expect he'll say something along the lines of some of Isabella I's old late 15th Century speeches, such as the infamous, "wipe them out like Mosquitos."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was a Spanish elector I would have voted for the PSOE untill this day while I would turn PODEMOS, the Spanish Monarchy prooved where they stood, from the Right who gave them back their legitimacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sami said:

If I was a Spanish elector I would have voted for the PSOE untill this day while I would turn PODEMOS, the Spanish Monarchy prooved where they stood, from the Right who gave them back their legitimacy.

You are french, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lizarraba said:

You are french, no?

Yep, and according to the former royal rules of my country (under the Constitutionnal Custom pre 1789) your King should be ours too :D.

(The treaty of 1712 states that normally the male elder son of the King is the heir, and Philippe the V was, normally no authority could decide to change it, but we were pissed off in 1712 so we accepted it).

I just love to see how they use the term "democracy", they should say "you're attacking our undirect representative democracy" if they do prefer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sami said:

Yep, and according to the former royal rules of my country (under the Constitutionnal Custom pre 1789) your King should be ours too :D.

(The treaty of 1712 states that normally the male elder son of the King is the heir, and Philippe the V was, normally no authority could decide to change it, but we were pissed off in 1712 so we accepted it).

I just love to see how they use the term "democracy", they should say "you're attacking our undirect representative democracy" if they do prefer.

At the end of the day, though monarchists like to pretend otherwise, a king or queen (or emperor, shah, sultan, emir, or what have you) is, in truth, just as artificial a construct of a title as a President, Prime Minister, Consul, Tyrant, Supreme Leader, Chairman or General Secretary of the Communist Party, THE Leader (as in the Fascist title), Despot, Tribal Chieftain, etc., and all can be changed by those hold effective power to do so within that given nation. None of these titles are of "higher" or "superior" calibre, more intrinsic or natural to governance, and certainly not Divinely endowed to rule over others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sami said:

Yep, and according to the former royal rules of my country (under the Constitutionnal Custom pre 1789) your King should be ours too :D.

(The treaty of 1712 states that normally the male elder son of the King is the heir, and Philippe the V was, normally no authority could decide to change it, but we were pissed off in 1712 so we accepted it).

I just love to see how they use the term "democracy", they should say "you're attacking our undirect representative democracy" if they do prefer.

no not really and that depending what monarchy rules and some of the top ten democratic countrys are monarchys and no the spainish king wouldnt be king of france that was change when the king that been overthrow by the second republic gave up the rights to that throne  to his one son that wasnt first in line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Patine said:

At the end of the day, though monarchists like to pretend otherwise, a king or queen (or emperor, shah, sultan, emir, or what have you) is, in truth, just as artificial a construct of a title as a President, Prime Minister, Consul, Tyrant, Supreme Leader, Chairman or General Secretary of the Communist Party, THE Leader (as in the Fascist title), Despot, Tribal Chieftain, etc., and all can be changed by those hold effective power to do so within that given nation. None of these titles are of "higher" or "superior" calibre, more intrinsic or natural to governance, and certainly not Divinely endowed to rule over others.

What?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sami said:

Yep, and according to the former royal rules of my country (under the Constitutionnal Custom pre 1789) your King should be ours too :D.

(The treaty of 1712 states that normally the male elder son of the King is the heir, and Philippe the V was, normally no authority could decide to change it, but we were pissed off in 1712 so we accepted it).

I just love to see how they use the term "democracy", they should say "you're attacking our undirect representative democracy" if they do prefer.

this would be the king https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Alphonse,_Duke_of_Anjou

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sami said:

Yep, and according to the former royal rules of my country (under the Constitutionnal Custom pre 1789) your King should be ours too :D.

(The treaty of 1712 states that normally the male elder son of the King is the heir, and Philippe the V was, normally no authority could decide to change it, but we were pissed off in 1712 so we accepted it).

I just love to see how they use the term "democracy", they should say "you're attacking our undirect representative democracy" if they do prefer.

this would be the king https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Alphonse,_Duke_of_Anjou

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Presidentinsertname said:

no not really and that depending what monarchy rules and some of the top ten democratic countrys are monarchys and no the spainish king wouldnt be king of france that was change when the king that been overthrow by the second republic gave up the rights to that throne  to his one son that wasnt first in line.

Yep I talk oiginally according to the first rules of the kingdom made untill the French Revolution.

It always been the 1st male, closest to the died King from a male parent at two exceptions.

The 1st in 1589 with Henry IV (he was the second in line technically)

The second was Philippe the V of Spain grandson of Louis XIV that Louis XIV and the French parliament called as legitimate heir untill the 1712 war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sami said:

Yep I talk oiginally according to the first rules of the kingdom made untill the French Revolution.

It always been the 1st male cloest to the died King from a male parent at two exceptions.

The 1st in 1589 with Henry IV (he was the second in line technically)

The second was Philippe the V that Louis XIV and the French parliament called as legitimate heir untill the 1712 war.

unless you support that bavarian guy or the napoleon heir (father or son)) ((fun fact the father is a vice mayor in corsica for the once major party the socialists. or the orleans heir or the queen of england could count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Presidentinsertname said:

unless you support that bavarian guy or the napoleon heir (father or son)) ((fun fact the father is a vice mayor in corsica for the once major party the socialists. or the orleans heir or the queen of england could count.

Our jurists pulled out a trick to exclude the English line from the French throne:

They used the Roman Law which considers that a woman can not have a public function

They also assimilated the priest function to the Crown.

They also said that the Salic Law was banning the heritage from a woman parent.

And finally they used the idea that a person can not transmit the heritage he or she has not an ancient Roman adage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sami said:

Our jurists pulled out a trick to exclude the English line from the French throne:

They used the Roman Law which considers that a woman can not have a public function

They also assimilated the priest function to the Crown.

They also said that the Salic Law was banning the heritage from a woman parent.

And finally they used the idea that a person can not transmit the heritage he or she has not an ancient Roman adage.

well then minus her but the bavarian guy is still consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×