Candide <***@anywhere.com> wrote:
: "Aggie" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
:> Thanks for your response.
:> >"The circumstances that you describe would require someone
:> >forging the actual registers, which would be phenomenally difficult
:> >Details of marriage registrations appear on sequentially numbered
:> >in bound volumes, and are viewable by the public"
:> Perhaps just forging one copy and destroying the other copies, if
:> are other copies, would suffice. And yes, it wouldn't be perfect, but
:> imagine that the forgery would not be caught for the first few days,
:> which should give the public enough time to absorb the information of
:> previous royal marriage. Then the forged registrar can be placed, for
:> "safe-keeping", in the royal vaults.
:> "Firstly, it would be necessary
:> to prove that the marriage had taken place before her marriage to
:> Andrew Parker Bowles, which apparently took place on July 4, 1973"
:> Yes, I had forgotten that for a moment. But, perhaps that marriage
:> would then be considered void, and ergo, the marriage between Charles
:> and Diana considered void. Or they can say that Charles and Camilla
:> a divorce in 1973, and that only the Andrew Parker Bowles/Camilla
:> marriage is invalid.
:> >However, any purported consent
:> >by it is entirely meaningless, since the Royal Marriages Act requires
:> >that consent be obtained from the Queen (and be formally recorded),
:> >perhaps from Parliament (whose proceedings are of course also
:> The constitution also requires that the marriage be registered in the
:> church's books, as well as receiving support from the privy council,
:> order for him to the heir.
:> Again, Queen Elizabeth II supporting Tom Parker Bowles for the
:> second-in-line isn't impossible; remember her animosity towards Diana.
:> And, if she died, King Charles will have an easier time appointing his
:> preferred successor.
: Neither "King" Charles nor any other monarch on the throne of GB has any
: such right to "appoint" a successor. Parliament holds all the reins in
: any matter relating to the succession and has done so since naming heirs
: of the Electress Sophia as heirs to the throne, and also other various
: acts in relation to the same matter.
Nonsensical as the ravings of Aggie are,
the claims of Parliament are incapable of
relevance regardless of who believes them.
: Prince Charles may have some funny ideas about what sort of monarch he
: would like to be, but am almost certain planning to install Tom Parker
: Bowles as an heir is not one of them. If PC did entertain any sort of
: dangerous ideas, Parliament could simply remove 'king" Charles and call
: the next in line (PW), and that would be the least of their options.
: What else could happen? The mind reels at the possibilities, ranging
: from removing the Windsors, to abolishing the monarchy all together.
The instant it disobeys the will of the Monarch,
Parliament becomes nothing but a criminal gang.
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.