 Prince Harry
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,164 Likes: 1
Should be Riding
|
OP
Should be Riding
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,164 Likes: 1 |
British Prince patriotically buys a Triumph motorcycle http://www.clutchandchrome.com/News/0810/News0810057.htmAlthough his brother prefers to ride a Ducati 1098, the younger royal is staying loyal to the British motorcycle manufacturer, Triumph. Its being reported by Britain's Daily Mail that Prince Harry, the younger of Prince Charles and the late Princess Diana's children has ordered a Triumph motorcycle to enjoy when he returns from the cross-country off road ride both Princes are currently taking part in. The pair, along with 86 other riders, set off from Port Edward in Kwazulu Natal on Saturday and after a brief ride along the dramatically beautiful Wild Coast, headed inwards to tackle a series of challenging runs along dusty goat paths and thickly-forested hillside including a gorge named the Mighty Bashee. Britain's Prince William and Prince Harry are taking part in an endurance motorcycle rally for charity in South Africa over a grueling eight-day, 1,000-mile adventure. Prince William has owned a motorcycle for at least two years, causing concern as he rode his high-powered sportsbike on British roads. His brother, Prince Harry has only recently obtained his motorcycle license, but was photographed riding in the deserts of Afghanistan on a deployment with the military unit he serves in. The group of ten royal riders includes their police bodyguard and the brother of Prince Harry's girlfriend all riding Honda trail bikes with the Princes moving a little slower and in visible pain at the end of the first days riding. More Triumph News
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,459 Likes: 1
Learned Hand
|
|
Learned Hand
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,459 Likes: 1 |
I think he is ready for an upgrade to a Triumph. 
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 973
3/4 Throttle
|
|
3/4 Throttle
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 973 |
Do you think he might turn up at Dent next year?
Before the war on terror, if I saw an unattended package I used to think "I'll be having that!"
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,459 Likes: 1
Learned Hand
|
|
Learned Hand
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,459 Likes: 1 |
Think he has a reputation for enjoying a good party and a few drinks, so probably.
Has Ray sent the invite?
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,210
Loquacious
|
|
Loquacious
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,210 |
do those guys have any political power anymore? Like the queen isnt ruling the country anymore right?....so theyre all just famous for being famous?
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,477
Oil Expert
|
|
Oil Expert
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,477 |
Quote:
I think he is ready for an upgrade to a Triumph.
LOL! When I was in the box, we referred to these bikes as "Haji Davidsons." They appeared to be a Honda knockoff cheaply made in China, and numerous folks on our FOB bought these to use to and from their workplaces and around the base. That is, until the major command Command Sergeant Major decided to prohibit anyone from riding motor scooters or motor bikes, then those who had them couldn't sell them.
JB
"Long live the Duck Force!"
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,440
Learned Hand
|
|
Learned Hand
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,440 |
Which model did he order? Will it be a Triumph or a Thairumph? 
'08 America Blue/White; Custom Headlamps, Custom Lowers, Clearview 20", Bafflectomy
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 740
Adjunct
|
|
Adjunct
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 740 |
They have no political power. The UK is a democracy, there power is ceremonial.
They are famous for being born into the British royal family,thats about it.
Bill.
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered."
-George Best
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,715 Likes: 4
Should be Riding
|
|
Should be Riding
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,715 Likes: 4 |
Quote:
They have no political power. The UK is a democracy, there power is ceremonial.
They are famous for being born into the British royal family,thats about it.
So they are like the Kennedys? (no apostrophe?) 
Always remember to be yourself. Unless you suck. Then pretend to be someone else.
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,715 Likes: 4
Should be Riding
|
|
Should be Riding
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,715 Likes: 4 |
And of course I'm kidding, we all know they can get away with murder.  dammit, there I go again
Always remember to be yourself. Unless you suck. Then pretend to be someone else.
|
|
|
OT "Democracy"
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,440
Learned Hand
|
|
Learned Hand
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,440 |
Quote:
The UK is a democracy
Referring to Western governments as democracies is a popular convenience, but blatantly untrue. A democracy requires that the citizenry rule itself by voting on laws. No modern country exists under such a system.
'08 America Blue/White; Custom Headlamps, Custom Lowers, Clearview 20", Bafflectomy
|
|
|
Prince Harry
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,823
Learned Hand
|
|
Learned Hand
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,823 |
dont change the subject..stop hijacking post.. Ed 
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,060 Likes: 6
Worn Saddle
|
|
Worn Saddle
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,060 Likes: 6 |
Actually, and our British cousins would know better than I, the queen does have some governmental powers within parliement. From what I've seen and read, the Queen actually works quite hard at her "job". (I'll bet harder than our idiot prince does!)
Fidelis et Fortis
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 300
Adjunct
|
|
Adjunct
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 300 |
i really think this country is headed to a socialist republic, wait few months-----"we gonna re-distribute the wealth"------
some people are like slinkies, they serve no purpose, but, they bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 740
Adjunct
|
|
Adjunct
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 740 |
Her power is ceremonial (like her role in the opening of Parliament).The Queen certainly does have some influence but no official power.
I am a Brit I just live in Vegas.
Roadworthy you are right...they are just like the Kennedys.
Bill.
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered."
-George Best
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 98
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 98 |
Quote:
Her power is ceremonial (like her role in the opening of Parliament).The Queen certainly does have some influence but no official power.
I am a Brit I just live in Vegas.
Roadworthy you are right...they are just like the Kennedys.
Although I would very much like to agree, the reality couldn't be more different. The current queen, despite official propaganda to the contrary, has considerably more power than her 18th century counterparts and has as much similarity to the Kennedys as dung does to chocolate.
The following points serve to illustrate:
1) Under the Crown Proceedings Act (1947), the Crown and the Duke of Cornwall have the right to 'control or otherwise intervene in proceedings that affect their rights, property and profits'. This, in a so-called democracy is quite extra-ordinary.
2) Whereas the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitutions provides US citizens with a guarantee of 'equality before the law', no such guarantee is available to Britons who are not 'citizens' of the state but 'subjects' of the Crown, despite the UK having signed the Treaty of the European Union which requires it to provide statutory or constitutional protection.
3) Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides the 'citizen' with the right to an effective remedy (ultimately in the courts) in the event that his or her rights have been violated by public authority. Unfortunately, despite another international Treaty requirement to guarantee an effective remedy, IMO one of the most important human rights, this has been omitted from the Human Rights Act (1998) which the government asserts, 'closely mirrors' the Convention.
These fundamentally important failures to comply with its international obligations clearly impacts upon the ordinary 'subject' in the UK.
4) The UK has no written constitution and therefore, there appears to be no constraints or limits, unless they are included within the Common Law, on what government can do to 'subjects'.
5) The British government is not the people's government, i.e. the people who elect it. It is Her Majesty's government and members of the parliament are required to take oaths to her Majesty before they can take their seats.
6) The British courts are not, as in the USA, the people's courts but are 'Crown Courts' in which the judiciary swear oaths of allegiance to an unelected head of state and not to a constitution or to the people.
7) The current queen is head of the Anglican Church (in the same way that the Pope is head of the Catholic church) and is, as far as this institution is concerned, God's representative on Earth.
Clearly, those people who wish to take on the crown, or the queen, stand no chance at all since judges are duty bound to favour the Crown or the Monarch, since under UK law, she is always more 'worthy'. Moreover, can anyone argue with God?
8) The monarch is unelected and unchallengeable. Legal injunctions exist in both Houses of Parliament on questions that, 'cast reflections' on the Royal Family.
9) Articles 37 and 38 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 prohibits the disclosure of information passing between the monarch and her prime minister. It is, consequently, impossible to ascertain who is telling whom.
10) The British monarch still retains a Privy Council, members of which are appointed solely on the monarch's invitation. Members are usually senior politicians, the judiciary, anglican clergy and members opf the armed forces. They are required to take an oath of allegiance to the Monarch and swear to uphold everything that she does and says. In the course of its operation, 'Orders in Council' are regularly issued. The general public is usually not informed about these feudal dictats that can override judgements in the highest courts of the land (the House of Lords) and parliament itself.
The Monarch in the whole of the UK with the sole exception of Cornwall is the owner of the soil of last resort. UK 'subjects' can possess the freehold of the land upon which their home is buit but that does not mean that they physically own it. It is, in effect, held on a long term tenancy arrangement. When the 'owner' dies with no dependents, ownership of the land reverts to the Crown and, in the bulk of the UK, with the sole exception of Cornwall, the whole of the nation benefits. In Cornwall's case, profits generated by these means in similar circumstances go to the benfit of just one unelected man, the Duke of Cornwall, Charles Windsor.
Under the Duchy of Cornwall Management Act 1863 - 1982 (still in force), the courts are required to accept as proof of ownership of property, any document signed by the Duke in which he claims title. This can even be unbelievably back-dated.
Of course, I could go on and on and on....but i think you get the picture.
If the Monarchy is there, as the government fatuously claims, 'to bring in the tourist buck', then why is there so much available to protect the financial interests, rights and property of one family who obtained its position by accident of birth?
Oh, let's not forget also that the declaration of war is the sole right of the Monarch. Our soldiers can be sent to their deaths in war without the approval of parliament.
And people still insist that the monarchy is just ceremonnial! 
Yehes ha sowena whath dheugh why a'gas henath!
|
|
|
Re: Prince Harry
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,096 Likes: 2
Fe Butt
|
|
Fe Butt
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,096 Likes: 2 |
Well, after that, I'm guessin' this isn't a very good time to say that I've always thought Oliver Cromwell was right! But then again, ya gotta remember that I was born and raised in a republic. Well, "a republic of sorts", anyway. That is, "a republic" controlled by the special interests and the lobbyists, anyway! (hey, come to think of it, maybe Cromwell was wrong afterall!!!...hey, anybody up for a Monarch 'round here???...couldn't be any worse, RIGHT???!!!)  
Last edited by Dwight; 10/22/2008 8:55 PM.
Yep! Just like a good Single Malt Scotch, you might call me "an acquired taste" TOO.(among the many OTHER things you may care to call me, of course)
|
|
|
|
|
