Reasons to be cheerful

Making the case against the Monarchy often  feels like pissing into royal wind. Because, to my astonishment, most people have an (unexamined) sentimental attachment to this feudal circus.

royal-fans-camped-outside-royal-baby-hospital

Not weirdos

Even obvious royal disasters like the queen interfering in the Scottish referendum or when the Windsors  could barely manage to squeeze out a tear between them  when poor oul Princess-Of-Hearts-England’s Rose In the Wind died…these awkward historical facts are hastily glossed over. Or sympathetically re-imagined featuring Helen Mirren.

Forlocks are tugged. Grovelling returns.

So for the rebel alliance, it often feels like things will never change – and indeed that is the point of the whole charade  – for us plebs gaze at the palaces with half wit wonder and understand that They are  immovable –  THE ROCK OF MONARCHY on which the glorious UK caste system is constructed.

But then, things never change until they do.

So here’s a couple of republican reasons to be cheerful…

They try to pretend that Queeny is  a near deity like in her existence,  but she’s human. And she’s going to the Great Royal Enclosure in the sky soon enought  (and please, be prepared for an orgy of orchestrated sad face ). And whilst I won’t cheer the death of another person,  nor will I feel any sense of loss.Nor should you. You don’t know her either.

Which brings us to the First republican reason to be cheerful – that Charles is next in line, and he is clearly a pitiful ol’ toff with a head full of broken biscuits.

Please feel free to exercise your Republican Anti-Charles muscles here. He’s an unsympathetic character, he’s clumsy, he’s dull.

The second  reason is that Harry Windsor’s said something genuinely intriguing –  that not one of the Unremarkable Windsor Family actually wants to wear the crown, and that he nearly ran away from the circus.

_96629920_mailonsunday
Amazing. A FREE MAGIC DINOSAUR EGG!

This is not as satisfying a finale as you and I doing wheelies  round the palace corridors whilst raiding the wine cellars, but we would accept their surrender.

Monarchy is  a form of child abuse – not as some of the rumour-mongers would have it – but as in, being a royal kid is being brought up as a freak, with no options, no real freedom to grow, and surrounded by flunkeys.  12 year old Harry was forced to stiff upper lip behind his mother’s coffin. C’mon, that’s pretty traumatising. (Interesting that Chazza never even got a ‘thanks Dad’ in same interview)

And thirdly,  the role of the right wing media is declining.  For years the monarchy has  received relentlessly fawning coverage in the newspapers. But who, under the age of 30, buys a newspaper? Social media is doesn’t do pull out souvenir specials.

And there’s only so many hammy Ant’n’Dec specials the royals can do.

So make your voice heard – tweet, facebook, declare yourself a republican. The only other option is to behave as if we already are a republic. When no-one watches royal specials, when no-one turns up at visits, then they’re already gone….

And finally….a self declared, proud republican very nearly became PM.  Fancy that !

And to continue our rebellion …you could….y’know….share a link to this blog on Facebook or Tweeter ?

s-l225

Ready for the revolution compadres.

 

 

 

 

 

A republican watches The Crown

 

One of the things that Monarchists take pride in, is the pageantry of Monarchy.

The jewels, the palaces, the robes, the titles, the kneeling, curtseying, the portraits, the gold, the wedding, the wealth, the glistening tears trickling down Diana’s soft cheeks…*sniff*

Even I will concede that a few idealistic republicans (UK) frothing around in donkey jackets brandishing witty placards can’t hope compete with that kind of upper class spectacle..

It’s  all deliberately  theatrical,  completely childish, invented tradition and of course, gruesomely  compelling

So it’s no wonder dramatists lap up the torrid tale of The Windsor family.

And on holiday – forgive me Rebel Alliance – I watched The Crown.

Screen Shot 2017-06-01 at 12.51.47

your critic

It’s brilliantly made, expensive and reeks of fags and bitterness. The cinematographer makes the palaces look damp and depressing, perhaps even like prisons ( the characters are often silhouetted against windows). At £100m for a series, it’s expensive – though of course, at £334m per year, yer real life less exciting monarchy costs us all more ( and entertains us less).

And to my surprise – there is just a hint of skepticism in The Crown.

Amidst all the palace porn & landrovers, there’s the argument that the Monarchy is actually more damaging to the Windsor Family than anyone else. These people are locked in a never ending feudal freak show – they can’t marry who they want, they have to spend a life idiotically waving at plebs and being bovine (which, admittedly, the real Windsors do very well.)

The writer Peter Morgan said in an interview with Radio Times – “That’s the imprisonment of the institution. And the suffering of the family ripples out from the crown, inflicting profound abuse on people upon whom it’s assumed it only projects luxury. It’s a hideous thing for them,” he says, “but as a drama it’s got everything.”

This isn’t the most potent argument against the Monarchy, but The Crown milks the ‘Trapped-in-a-Golden-Cage’ trope for all it’s worth.

On a daily basis, the lumpen masses are encouraged to venerate the  demi-gods of the royal family, but this drama tries to humanise them. That’s what counts for royal subversion on TV these days.

Of course, subjects can’t hope for too much. The drama is entirely in sympathetic with the Windsor family and falls into the category of “It’s Hard Living A Life Of Extraordinary Privilege” that will appeal to the Downton viewers in Ohio. It’s said the royals like it. I’m sure they do. Peter Morgan, already has a CBE for services to drama. So he’s already shown he’s happy to be in the Establishment Petting Zoo.

Screen Shot 2017-06-01 at 12.58.17And  yet en route The Crown exposes the stiff, starched idiocy of Monarchy – that Princess Margaret can’t marry some dull bloke, it hints at Phil the Greek being a shagger, and gradually reveals that – who knew – being walled up in a palace for your whole life damages those within.

This is a useful trope for republicans to remember when Big Geoff in the office mutters ‘oh leave them alone’.

The people who make the royal family’s life a misery are… monarchists.

These dullards wet their pants when someone takes a photograph of a royal kiddy, then buy the newspapers and announce their disapproval.

They are the people who always want more, more, more  – fawning and clapping dumbly at every royal burp and fart.

If you really want to make Prince George and you want him to lead as ‘normal a life as possible’ then leave them alone.

Let the Windsor family go off and be boring toffs and hunt foxes without us having to pay for them.

Sympathy for the Windsors  ? Become a Republican.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My message to you today….

one-amused-guide-queen-many-facesEven amongst those Who Should Know Better,  the received wisdom is that The Queen Never Puts a Foot Wrong.

Maybe its Lizzie’s shoes. ( this article explains that some poor fat  peasant actually breaks in the queen’s shoes and  – I shit you not – ‘The Queen does not perspire’ )

Or maybe….just maybe…this is She’s OUR PERFECT QUEEN all  part of the utterly risible establishment guff ? Part of the way the forelock tuggers constantly & relentlessly usher away  an inconvenient pattern of royal contempt for ordinary folk.

nicholas-witchell-large

Say what you like about royal reporters, Nicholas Witchell is a BLOODY GEM

Lets look at  oul’ Betty Windsor and her “faultless” Queening.

She Doesn’t Interfere In Politics : She’s completely neutral. In  a Lives In a huge mansion / surrounded by sycophants / loves hunting / staggering wealth given to her for nothing / embodies rigid hierarchy and sentimentalises class  inequality- kind of way. “Our”  neutral national figurehead is a green welly-ed range rover driving hunting shooting fishing type married to a xenophobic bully and daughter of ‘Alf Garnet in a Tiara‘ who is paraded about in diamonds and a golden carriage.

OK you can argue that’s just cultural politics. One doesn’t actually interfere in the political process does One ?  I mean….apart from the BBC’s revelation (followed by snivelling  apologetic retraction) about her lobbying the Home Secretary to arrest Abu Hanza ? And apart from the Scottish referendum ? And the sacking of the Australian prime minister ?

These are just the instances we know about. What does she moan about to bowing & curtsying  Prime Ministers in her weekly audience ?  ( think about that for a minute) Do you think that you’d make small talk about the corgis ? Lets face it. She can, and has, and will interfere in politics in ways we’ll never know about.

She’s Brilliant at Being Queen: Well, compared to  who? If your job is to wave and smile

_84349271_84349268

Never puts a foot – or arm -wrong.

for 40 minutes twice a week…she seems a bit….sulky looking to me.  Cold. Distant. Stiff. I don’t need my Head of State to be weeping and embracing like an X Factor Finalist, but it’s kind of weird that the only display of genuine emotion was when her taxpayer funded yacht was taken away.

All Elizabeth Windsor really has to do is not offend people for 40 minutes during her dull visits. During one of the many BBC tug-your-forelock-fests, the queen’s ‘legendary’  ( © all papers all the time, no evidence ) sense of humour was recalled as she referred to ambassador’s from another country as ‘a gorilla’ ( no racism there then ).  Clap. Clap. Clap. And lets face it, those sulky dull Christmas Messages are hardly a masterclass in charismatic communication.

1877-newspaper-headlines-palace-makeover-or-369m-splurgeEven on a practical side, she’s terrible at being Managing the Monarchy – that’s why you, and I, and everyone else is about to cough up  £369m to repair the palaces that she has let fall into neglect ( the Sovereign Grant is supposed to pay towards maintenance of palaces, not £8m helicopters for your idle grandchildren ).

She even had the cheek to try to take money from funds meant for the poor.

I have no problems with Elizabeth Windsor being elected queen, if that’s what the people want. But please don’t get your union jack knickers in a twist telling me she’s a brilliant queen. You’ve no idea if she’s a brilliant queen.

Davina might be better at waving, smiling and breeding than Regina. But we have no choice. Nothing to compare Mrs Windsor to.

So there you go.

Her Christmas Message will always be the same.

The message is always…. posh people are in control.  From the palaces you pay for, they’ll tell you that the army are great and that they’ve had a tough year.

This is tradition plebs,so don’t question it.

Merry Christmas !

 

Relentless royal rubbish…

810a76fe902fdb2f9962462101cb5b5d

The pinnacle of british genes

The Windsor family  cost us an estimated £334m.

A couple of days a week, they do comfy cushion 45 minute visits  but it’s hardly Real Work

They feed their dogs steak from silver trays ( according to rank, even corgis are subject to snobbery ).

4a0e8ebb_e803_44fe_a115_7d9194b42ed7

Any colour, as long as it’s fawn

And now, fellow serfs –  bless your lucky forelock  – you are being offered the chance to Clean For the Queen. Get onto your knees Britain… for the approval of someone who believes that every single one of you are inherently and justifiably beneath her.

Not for your community, not for the environment, not for wildlife. But to impress a sour faced old  aristocrat who lives in a palace filled with servants.  Oh  whilst you’re  down there grovelling …can you grab that rusty Tennant’s Super can and those Wotsit wrappers…?

And just to underline the unimpeachable integrity of the idea,  Clean for the Queen sponsors include…McDonalds, Greggs, Wrigley, Costa – yeah shut your lefty critical mouth, you CANNOT criticise any of those companies for contributing to the  litter problem can you ? ( 3% of all litter is fast food related and chewing gum costs a fortune to remove).

chew460276

Wrigley, keeping the queens highway clean

Fair-pay-for-royal-cleaners

It’s also worth remembering that those who Did Clean for the Queen had to fight to get a living wage. Maybe she expected them to work for free too.

Occasionally, at Revolting Subject Rebel Command, I think that I’ve spotted the exhaust port in the Royal Death star, and with one republican X wing torpedo, the whole feudal circus will go kaboom ( Princess Leah is allowed to be a princess until the medals are dispersed, but then she must change her name to BunFace McGinty ). And Clean For the Queen feels monumentally  unjust.

Think about it – to bail out the banks ( = the super-rich) vast amounts have been cut from  essential front line services. The super-rich royals got a 29% pay rise last year. But local councils who clean up the streets ? Cuts, cuts, cuts. The whole Clean for the Queen idea is predicated on the failed ‘Big Society’ premise –  ruddy faced toffs at the top of the class pyramid cajole the underlings to clean up for their viewing pleasure ?

The taxes you pay no longer fund binmen and street sweepers – increasingly, it subsidises the lives of the super rich, the private jets, the unaccountable… [ good Monbiot article on tax here]. So services suffer. Clean up serfs. If you don’t a TV documentary crews  will turn up and mock the poorest in society for  living in squalor.

This isn’t directly the fault of the Windsors of course. But they’re part of this horrible,stinking, vile, social conditioning. Some will fall for it – the Keep Calm and Carry On deference is hard to root out from British culture. But  social media allows us to howl at the dumbness of such an approach, to say to the 70 mps – the very MPs who are cutting local authority cleaning budgets – show some concern for the ordinary people rather than sniffing around for gongs and publicity you shameless self centred imbeciles.

Here’s an alternative suggesting: Queen for the Clean Up – announce that the queen will be the last monarch, gently wind down all tax & state support for the Windsor family, give them a palace and couple of horses and let them live a yah lifestyle elsewhere.

Clean out the cynical anti-democratic House of Lords, the dusty posh landowners and sycophantic bauble chasers.

Get off your knees and clean up democracy.

Here. Sign a petition.

Oh yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh THAT WILL DO IT !

EMBARRASSING TRANSPARENT PLEA FOR RTs: There are hundreds of uncritical  royal correspondents, hours of Ant n Dec fawning, BBC sycophancy, and  an army of civil servants paid for by your tax dedicated to selling the royal circus as harmless fun. So if you can share this post via Facebook or Twitter ( or elsewhere) then it’ll make you cyber Che Guevara.

cheselleck-111

 

 

 

 

 

 

There’s no evidence oul Queeny is lovely….

slide_229959_1044956_free

Little Maam

“She’s lovely” & “she seems really normal” are the two absurd responses from Forelock Tuggers Who’ve Met the Queen.

Of course, if the BBC stuck a mic under some plebs nose  and they scratched their head and announced “She seemed a bit cold and aloof and I didn’t enjoy feeling like a little person” then they’ll never make the daily 6 o’clock fawnfest. That’s the way vox-pops work – it’s about confirming a red courduroy establishment view and the less you know the about the subject the more weight is given to your response. It’s fundamentally patronising to viewer and person being interviewed (ergo it’s perfect for Royal Coverage)

Anyway, there it is.  A sacred totem of royal coverage.

The Queen, is lovely.

There’ll be the occasional critic of Charles, and even William these days, but the Queen is UNCRITICISABLE.

*clears throat*

Firstly, lets have some sympathy for ol’ Elizabeth. As Johann Hari wisely argues, Monarchy Damages Everyone the Windsor Family. She was walled up in a palace from the

_84349271_84349268

don’t buy The Sun. Written by the posh, to fool the thick, into hating the poor.

moment she was born.  Her uncle – the man who would be King – taught her how to salute the admired Mr Hitler whilst her father was reduced to stammering wreck  when he had to become King ( The Kings Speech is a well made film, but it is fiction ).

Being in the monarchy meant that Lizzy had no pals, didn’t go to school, and was not allowed to behave like a normal kid. She hung out with horses and corgis.  She was inspecting  military regiments by the time she was 16 (  I was slow dancing to Frankie Goes to Hollywood Power of Love with Sally McChristie in my Wranglers when I was 16 . And that was nerve wracking ).

But maybe that’s enough sympathy. This bizarre life warped her.

The Monarchy can’t have it both ways – you criticise the institution and people say “stop it… the queen is lovely’. You criticise the individual members of the Windsor clan and apologists say “it’s not fair to attack them”.

So lets look at some of the queen’s history for evidence of loveliness…

Consider this: When Charles was just 5 years old, the queen went on a royal tour for…6 MONTHS. Then, when she returned, she spent 4 days dealing with paperwork and then a day at the races before she saw poor oul’ Chuck – and then….SHE SHOOK HIS HAND. No wonder Charles is a dithering shuffling basket case.

For more evidence of prince charles’s ‘mummy’  see this Johann Hari article from Independent points out –

“Anthony Jay, who scripted the documentary Elizabeth R, explains: “She’s one of those people who is deeply unemotional. For people who are emotionally detached in that way, institutions become more important than families. The Queen’s children were handed over to nannies, and a kind of emotional cauterisation took place. Something was sealed off very early. For her, that is a strength. If she were emotionally involved, she couldn’t do her job.”

princess-of-wales-princess-diana-29995608-452-597

*weeps*

Despite the cinematic revisionist history, the queen didn’t appear to be upset by the death of Diana, and in fact rigidly stuck to cold protocol until the Blairite government poked her ( Camilla like ) with it’s touchy feely  stick and told her to get her royal arse emoting. Dead daughter-in-law ?  Cold non reaction ( until told ). For royal yacht britannia – public weeping.

The press often celebrate her casual unpleasantness – with that wry-end-of-the-bulletin-newsreader-smirk…

For example, Royal protection officers  who’s  job description  -lets not forget –  is to throw their body onto a grenade if anyone were to attack the queen, made her “furious” by…er… nibbling some of the taxpayer funded nuts left out in bowls in Buckingham palace.

Then there are news stories such as this – the queen being so impatient she couldn’t wait for some toddlers to move aside for her jaguar – had  this been about any other aristocrat or celebrity, the tabloids would be lining up experts from the AA to condemn her driving. Instead the Mirror still managed to spin it as Brilliant Royals.

Then there’s the fact that she makes her family curtsy, bow and grovel to her and each other, as she strictly enforces etiquette and protocol. Most people give their granny a hug or at least make a nice cup of tea. The queen makes her family bow to her.

And just..generally. She never looks happy, she looks grumpy, bored, disinterested in the life of gilded privilege and opportunity she was born into. At least an elected head of state would be there of their own volition.

So anyway, every time someone opines The Queen Is Lovely. Stand up and shout  NO SHES HORRIBLE and slam the door as you leave the room. This will help the Republican cause enormously.

FINAL SCORE

Seemed Like A Lovely Old Woman 0

Seems Like a Damaged Old Snob 5

[ whiney voice: every day, almost every paper publishes some sycophantic drivel about the Windsor family. Please tweet & facebook this article as a pathetic act of republican defiance]

article-1338484243981-1330b285000005dc-708947_568x387

Tonight I’m gonna party like it’s 1899

 

 

 

 

 

The magical Windsor Vagina.

To become the head of state in Britain, you basically have to emerge from the vagina of someone called Windsor. That’s yer qualifications right there.

princegeorgecake2

This woman made a cake of George. Brain like a sponge.

Ability, talent, intelligence, desire, diplomatic skills, wisdom, looks, popularity  – who needs these qualities in a head of state ? Not us ! We’ve got DAS WINDSORS. As I’m fond of blurting out after a few bottles of Frosty Jacks – the thickest, laziest, sleaziest royal is  automatically granted more influence & wealth than the hardest working, smartest, coolest working class kid could ever earn.

And by that I mean your kid too. This seems blatantly unfair. They know it.

So the royals like to pretend that they’re a diverse bunch. That there’s a rich  and diverse gene pool of talent surrounding the crown. As oppose to a bunch of unimpressive dim toffs spawned from one unremarkable family in the wealthiest part of London.

Charles Mountbatten Windsor is known as: His Royal Highness Prince Charles Philip Arthur George, Prince of Wales, KG, KT, GCB, OM, AK, QSO, PC, ADC, Earl of Chester, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland.

The media often cravenly mutter “In Scotland,  where Prince Charles is Screen Shot 2015-07-02 at 21.20.47known as the Duke of Rothesay…“. Er….to be honest, when I nip out for a pint in Glasgow he’s known as that useless tosspot in the barbour jacket.

Andrew Mountbatten Windsor – pretends his name is The Duke of York or In Scotland he’s called The Earl of Inverness. He’s not.  Of course if you want to use the less formal term you can call him The One With The Paedophile Friend Who Meets With Trafficked Young Girls For Disgusting Exploitative Reasons. See here.

William ( “Wills” ) is Prince William Arthur Philip Louis Mountbatten Windsor is  The Duke of Cambridge ( he doesn’t live in Cambridge). Harry has “WALES” on his uniform, but that’s not his name. The Duke of Edinburgh isn’t seen in Leith much.

Of course, even the  Windsors are a confection to keep  popular with the plebs. They were the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha family until 1917, when they became the Windsors to hide their Germanic roots (this is pointed out not from xenophobia, but to highlight how certain Eternal Traditions are quickly ignored if it saves their skin ). I’d imagine the Mountbatten will be being discretely dropped….

They’re dull. They’re snobs. Despite a compliant media who do everything they can to create the illusion of a diverse and multiskilled dynamic royal family, reality bites.

They’re a bunch of dull old bores who sit on their arse most of the time. Prince Charles even has a cushion man to ensure his arse is comfortable.

Screen Shot 2015-11-18 at 21.00.26And every time they complain about media intrustion into their private lives, remember that it is the monarchy is the one obsessed with bloodlines…

So who they sleep with…is fair game.

That’s the price one pays for insisting that the finest way to choose a head of state is to finda kinda regina vagina.

Please RT & Facebook Share. I don’t have relentless grovelling media toadys to disseminate such subversion…..]

 

 

 

 

Glasgow versus the Queen

In Scotland, there’s a bit of a smart thing going on.

1277678_608923449148847_770556601_oDuring the referendum Scotland started questioning everything, trying to figure out, from scratch What’s Important For A (Reborn) Country. And even though, in the end,  Scots opted to stay in the UK, the country had got the hang of the idea of interrogating the assumptions of the powerful.

This year, the Scottish Government completed a new hospital in Glasgow, the header_nsghc_wide_01biggest in the country. The entire £842m cost was  financed by the Scottish taxpayer, built on time, and without some lame brain PFI malarky. Glasgow, and Scotland is proud of it.

Then a rich old aristocratic woman shows up, who is doesn’t use the NHS, who sits on her arse eating swans in palace 345 miles from Glasgow… she stays for about 45 minutes, says nothing of interest, then pisses off and…..they Name The NHS Hospital After Her.

_MG_5543

Glasgwegian. RAGING WITH QUEEN.

Glasgow has an appalling health record, mostly as a result of poverty and vast inequality. But now,  as the stricken from Drumchapel, Castlemilk and Govan  gasp for help, they will be obliged to say take me to….The Queen Elizabeth University Hospital.

It’s like a sick joke. But, as airport bombers found out, Glasgow likes to put up a fight.

About a mile from the hospital, is Sunny Govan Community Radio, and  one if its broadcasters, John Beattie – who worked in the NHS for 10 years – felt annoyed enough to started a petition saying that “we the people oppose the new South Glasgow University Hospital being named after a monarch“, hoping for a few thousand signatures.

So far, over 13,500 people have signed the petition. ( please sign here)

Purple faced and pathetic,  NHS Glasgow Glasgow Health board hit back, claiming it was ‘an honour’ for staff & patients to meet the queen and have the hospital named after her.

Lets ask the staff then….. A senior Dr Keith McKillop wrote to the Glasgow Herald saying….

“Queen Elizabeth is the most potent symbol of the glaring inequalities in our society, a vivid representation of the growing gulf between rich and poor. The name of the new hospital is not unimportant. One of my other bits of paper is an honours degree in theology, so I’m qualified to know that symbols carry meaning, power and influence. I am reluctantly obliged to reinforce the illusion that our hospital, and therefore our health, is the charitable gift of a benevolent monarch to her less fortunate subjects.”

Dr McKillop goes on to say that the general feeling amongst staff  is far from being ‘honoured’ they are either indifferent or object to the name.

Contrary to recieved wisdom, some Doctors can write very clearly…he goes on…

79-140R0131T9523“The association of royalty with healing is a medieval superstition with no place in the 21st century NHS. How can I realistically encourage the people of Glasgow to take responsibility for their health and wellbeing, for self-improvement, when the renamed hospital perpetuates the ideal of an inflexible social order? It suggests they should take life as it comes and accept their subsidiary position. It quite literally subjugates its patients.

Bravo Dr McKillop !

So who made this crass offensive decision ?

Such was the controversy that Andrew Robertson ( OBE ! Ha ! ), the chairman of Greater Glasgow Health Board wrote to the Glasgow Herald, “explaining” that they couldn’t consider a range of different names for the hospital as it would result in disappointment for those who’s preferred names weren’t chosen (this is establishment patronising speak for It’ll End In Tears…).

He claimed that Senior staff and senior nurses ‘considered’ the royal name ( and, it is implied, approved). But when the Herald made a request to see the minutes of the meetings, it turns out they didn’t exist.

Inviting this uneducated privately treated woman to Daimler up to Scotland to name  the hospital after herself cost over £100,000 ( this was only revealed after a Wings Over Scotland submitted a FoI request).

It looks unlikely that the hospital will be renamed. Naming a hospital after a royal is a risible idea, and I hope members of the Scottish government are squirming with embarrassment,

But at least Glasgow didn’t roll over and fawn. And that’s a start.

( despite the fact that -for once – this IS an interesting royal news story, it got very little attention, so please share on Facebook and Twitter and spray on the walls of royal palaces. Ta.)

images

UPDATE: 12 November 2015 – having gathered over 16,000 names, the petition is now closed.