Originally Posted by newspresenter

Queen Elizabeth II, head of state of the United Kingdom and of 31 other states and territories, is the legal owner of about 6,600 million acres of land, one sixth of the earth’s non ocean surface.
She is the only person on earth who owns whole countries, and who owns countries that are not her own domestic territory. This land ownership is separate from her role as head of state and is different from other monarchies where no such claim is made – Norway, Belgium, Denmark etc.
The value of her land holding. £17,600,000,000,000 (approx).

Hi,

this is really great news as it may well act as our Country's sheet anchor in the storm ahead.

I can think of no country which would have handled this wealth which would seem to act like a huge heavy stabilising keel on our own ship of State - thus unlike other peoples we do not slither and slide around on a volatile heaving deck.

The stability of such a system gives incentive to all as there is no social barrier to monetary sucess with or without education. A Country, as with many others where this stabilising influence pertains, where personal wealth creation is a reality.

This does favour our status when one looks at Communism or even the Fabianesque socialism of Common Purpose - a system doomed to recycle their collapse more rapidly. Hence the USSR collapsed in line with constructions like the EU on a cyclical basis of about 70 years and it is no surprise that the EU is starting to look very fragile with Greece & Ireland on the verge of leaving - unable to sustain their membership of the EUro as they teeter on the edge of bankruptcy.

That due to his economic illiteracy Brown has idiotically painted us into about £800 Billion+ whilst China has a debtt of about £70 Billion - that although we have about 1/10th of the population of China and even less land mass we have 10+X the debt!

It is the underpinning of our Country with the wealth of the Monarchy that makes this a possibility as it precludes a failure like Brown with no economic common sense merely selling off everything to dishonestly hide his idiocy.

India - a Country prone to famine has introduced under the Moghuls centuries ago encouragement of Buddhism thus veneration of animals which thus produce edible by products and fuel if they killed the animals to eat them they would never recover from the famine!

Look at Africa - over bred in good times and over grazed in hard times = Doomed!

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Originally Posted by newspresenter

Queen Elizabeth II, head of state of the United Kingdom and of 31 other states and territories, is the legal owner of about 6,600 million acres of land, one sixth of the earth’s non ocean surface.
She is the only person on earth who owns whole countries, and who owns countries that are not her own domestic territory. This land ownership is separate from her role as head of state and is different from other monarchies where no such claim is made – Norway, Belgium, Denmark etc.
The value of her land holding. £17,600,000,000,000 (approx).
This makes her the richest individual on earth. However, there is no way easily to value her real estate. There is no current market in the land of entire countries. At a rough estimate of $5,000 an acre, and based on the sale of Alaska to the USA by the Tsar, and of Louisiana to the USA by France, the Queen’s land holding is worth a notional $33,000,000,000,000 (Thirty three trillion dollars or about £17,600,000,000,000). Her holding is based on the laws of the countries she owns and her land title is valid in all the countries she owns. Her main holdings are Canada, the 2nd largest country on earth, with 2,467 million acres, Australia, the 7th largest country on earth with 1,900 million acres, the Papua New Guinea with114 million acres, New Zealand with 66 million acres and the UK with 60 million acres.
She is the world’s largest landowner by a significant margin. The next largest landowner is the Russian state, with an overall ownership of 4,219 million acres, and a direct ownership comparable with the Queen’s land holding of 2,447 million acres. The 3rd largest landowner is the Chinese state, which claims all of Chinese land, about 2,365 million acres. The 4th largest landowner on earth is the Federal Government of the United States, which owns about one third of the land of the USA, 760 million acres. The fifth largest landowner on earth is the King of Saudi Arabia with 553 million acres
Checkout the 5 Largest personal landowners on Earth
Queen Elizabeth II6,600 million acresKing Abdullah of Saudi Arabia553 million acresKing Bhumibol of Thailand126 million acresKing Mohammed IV of Morocco113 million acresSultan Quaboos of Oman76 million acres
Largest five personal landowners on EarhQueen Elizabeth II6,600 million acresKing Abdullah of Saudi Arabia553 million acresKing Bhumibol of Thailand126 million acresKing Mohammed IV of Morocco113 million acresSultan Quaboos of Oman76 million acresWho Owns the World Largest Landowner

To put £17.6 Trillion into context, 1000 million = 1 billion, and 1000 billion = 1 trillion. Sickening hey.

Are these this the Queen's personal holdings or land owned by the Crown?

Also, why does this bother you?

Three cheers for the Queen!

Hip hip! ...

Originally Posted by The Untalented Mr Ripley

Are these this the Queen's personal holdings or land owned by the Crown?

Also, why does this bother you?

I don't know the first point, but i would suggest its part of the cartel that is the Monarch, which is why it bothers me, because i believe the English should own an equal share of England. The whole world is set up like a cartel running a casino, and the casino always wins.

Originally Posted by newspresenter

I don't know the first point, but i would suggest its part of the cartel that is the Monarch, which is why it bothers me, because i believe the English should own an equal share of England. The whole world is set up like a cartel running a casino, and the casino always wins.

So what exactly do we (or England, or the Queen) win?

Complete and utter nonsense were is the evidence all i See is a site full of conspiracy theories

Originally Posted by newspresenter

I don't know the first point, but i would suggest its part of the cartel that is the Monarch, which is why it bothers me, because i believe the English should own an equal share of England. The whole world is set up like a cartel running a casino, and the casino always wins.

Hi,

you make your point well.

Clearly you favour Communism a concept from which all who have tried for any period seek to escape from and overthrow.

As for a well managed casino - have you noticed the huge attraction such casinos are with places like Vegas, Atlanta, Macau, Monaco etc. places to which people flock by choice able to enjoy luxury, hope dreams and faux splendor for a short time in all too colourless lives.

What a relief that such an amount is held by the Crown & Monarchy well distanced from economic illiterates like Gordon Brown and the Kleptocratic QUANGOcracy.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Originally Posted by Greg Lance-Watkins

What a relief that such an amount is held by the Crown & Monarchy well distanced from economic illiterates like Gordon Brown and the Kleptocratic QUANGOcracy.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Only works if it's true? But how true is it after all that's on hell of a secret to be kept hidden from the world for so long?

Originally Posted by fubar

Only works if it's true? But how true is it after all that's on hell of a secret to be kept hidden from the world for so long?

Hi,

true but taking it on face value it is very good news and if it is an exageration even then that the Crown is so wealthy at even a percentage is of benefit to us all.

The many failures of spacing in the OP would SEEM to indicate this is not new research and has been much copied amongst the failures and inadequates who seek to blame their failure on others.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Originally Posted by newspresenter

I don't know the first point, but i would suggest its part of the cartel that is the Monarch, which is why it bothers me, because i believe the English should own an equal share of England. The whole world is set up like a cartel running a casino, and the casino always wins.

We could always start by "freeing" Scotland and immediately deporting Brown, Darling and half of nuLab to be reunited with their kin.

The remaining English should then immediately round-up all republicans and offer them the choice of humane execution or worse, deportation to France.

Originally Posted by Patriot1

So what exactly do we (or England, or the Queen) win?

We win the right to live n work on their land.
England is a name of our country which has little meaning to the cartel. Its just a factory to them.
The Monarch benefits from our hard work.

Originally Posted by Greg Lance-Watkins

Clearly you favour Communism.

I hate communism, im a Nationalist.

Originally Posted by newspresenter

I hate communism, im a Nationalist.

Hi,

but your views as stated were clearly based on Communism which many consider to be an expansionist and misguided form of Nationalism based on the ideology of a bunch of Marxist nutters seeking to destroy incentive and create an apparatchik class of new wealthy - as with the EU.

Are you sure you are not confusing the purist concept of Patriotism with the navel gazing of communist governance and nationalism?

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Originally Posted by Greg Lance-Watkins

Hi,

but your views as stated were clearly based on Communism which many consider to be an expansionist and misguided form of Nationalism based on the ideology of a bunch of Marxist nutters seeking to destroy incentive and create an apparatchik class of new wealthy - as with the EU.

Are you sure you are not confusing the purist concept of Patriotism with the navel gazing of communist governance and nationalism?

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Being a nationalist doesn't mean you follow a monarch, who by the way are anti-English in their social and political beliefs, or mentally insane if not.

I don't mind the monarchy existing, i just don't wana fund it, and forced to either, and i don't want someone being an unelected head of state, thats fascism.

I want the English to elect English people to run English society.
I want the English to equally own (not share), English land.

Originally Posted by newspresenter

Being a nationalist doesn't mean you follow a monarch, who by the way are anti-English in their social and political beliefs, or mentally insane if not.

I agree - being a Nationalist is an introspective, exclusive and divisive concept - largely selfish and frequently founded on fear and inadequacy - unlike Patriotism.

Also Patriotism tend to embrace customs and values which include concepts in Governance be they democratic as Britain used to be or undemocratic as America has always been. Monarchy would SEEM to be the most stable long term form of Governance without control by terror as with China etc.

Your claims of the opinions of our Monarch are strange! Can you substantiate them?

Originally Posted by newspresenter

I don't mind the monarchy existing, i just don't wana fund it, and forced to either,

On every cost benefit analysis on Monarchy it has been shown that the British Monarchy are a positive asset and major contributor - generating hugely more than they cost.

Originally Posted by newspresenter

and i don't want someone being an unelected head of state, thats fascism.

Nor do I want a politician be they elected or appointed. and in passing NO that is not fascism.

Originally Posted by newspresenter

I want the English to elect English people to run English society.

Being a patriot I want the very best leaders elected from within these United Kingdoms to provide our Government for Britain as the servants of the British peoples, for the benefit of all - without use of list politics, Google Page Ranking or more than 2 fixed length terms, with a facility for recall and referenda! At ALL levels.

Originally Posted by newspresenter

I want the English to equally own (not share), English land.

A Communist concept which has proven unworkable on every instance in which it has been implemented as it leads to a grossly disincentivised society.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Originally Posted by newspresenter

I want the English to elect English people to run English society.
I want the English to equally own (not share), English land.

Good solid socialist statements there. Although (I may be wrong) all our debts are underwritten by land (also is the theoretical basis for our currency as the gold standard was abolished long ago, although this is news to some here). Thus surely the queen is the guarantor of all Britain's debts (as the only person who technically owns any land in the UK) and as such if we go bankrupt it is the Queen and not the people who is ultimately liable - goody goody

Originally Posted by Greg Lance-Watkins

I agree - being a Nationalist - largely selfish and frequently founded on fear.

Selfish?
Is there any political belief system that isn't founded on fear? Take the far left, they're currently out of control putting for of the planet boiling out of control whilst the planet has been cooling down over the last 11 years.

Also Patriotism tend to embrace customs and values which include concepts in Governance be they democratic as Britain used to be or undemocratic as America has always been.

Does patriotism embrace foriegness? Democracy exists in small amounts in all countries.

Monarchy would SEEM to be the most stable long term form of Governance

Are you suggesting the 'british' monarch govern britain?

Your claims of the opinions of our Monarch are strange! Can you substantiate them?

Which monarch opinions? I find it hard to believe, that when humans can gain a certain amount of power, whether that be a leader of a community group, political party etc, that they don't use it to their advantage. Being trillionaires, once you've got everything money can buy, what stimulates the mind, control perhaps? In time, over hundreds of years, does it turn into a game.

On every cost benefit analysis on Monarchy it has been shown that the British Monarchy are a positive asset and major contributor - generating hugely more than they cost.

Where/who says that?

Nor do I want a politician be they elected or appointed. and in passing NO that is not fascism.

If the people cannot decide who should rule/run the country, the only other option is intolerance of the people = fascism.

Being a patriot I want the very best leaders elected from within these United Kingdoms to provide our Government for Britain as the servants of the British peoples, for the benefit of all

How do you wana decide how you get that?

A Communist concept

no its not, communism is where we share it via the head of state. I mean, own, lock stock n barrel, meaning, even the military, the highest power or law cannot set foot on your bit of land without the owner say so.