Why I hate royalty -Prince Charles 'accepted a suitcase with 1m euros', report claims

[malaise]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-61941113

The Prince of Wales accepted a suitcase containing a million euros in cash from a former Qatari prime minister, the Sunday Times has reported.
The paper says this was one of three cash donations from Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim totalling three million euros.
Clarence House said donations from the sheikh were passed immediately to one of the prince's charities and all the correct processes were followed.
There is no suggestion the payments were illegal.
According to the Sunday Times, Prince Charles received the three cash donations in person from the former prime minister between 2011 and 2015.
————-
They remain shameless

[gldstwmn]

1. Isn't it illegal to travel with a million Euros in cash?

Maybe not in Britain.

[malaise]

3. Laws apply to us peons

That is all

[brooklynite]

11. Of course its not illegal, seriously.

What's required is it be properly reported.

There is no suggestion the payments were illegal.

[pandr32]

22. +1

[gldstwmn]

34. Thanks. I'll forego the travelers checks

and gold bars next time.

[Sympthsical]

66. This is why I only travel with beanie babies

Mainly because they're easily mashed into the overhead.

[JT45242]

2. A lot less than they gave kushner and the trumps

They grease palms of rich elites all over the world.

[Orrex]

4. The entire notion of "royals" is fundamentally disgusting

I couldn't care less about feel-good stories of charitable works or valor in the Navy; the idea that some family is "royal" based on nothing more than happenstance of birth is toxic to civilized thinking.

The only thing worse than the concept of "royals" is how lovingly the American media and populace drool over these elitist welfare recipients every chance they get.

[malaise]

5. +1,000

We either believe in democracy or a monarchy - there is no place for both. I despise all royalty wherever they are - the idea of some crime family believing in their superiority over the rest of us is absolute bullshit.

[jimfields33]

6. You forgot that Elizabeth had a huge tragedy when she became Queen

The worst thing happened to her. Her father died. That could not have been easy for her to get over. It’s a miracle she was able to stay sane during that time. No daughter deserves that dread. And no title or money makes up for her tragic life. I feel so horrible for her.

[ornotna]

10. Yes

Her life has been such a struggle since then.

[jimfields33]

16. True. Hasn't been easy that's for sure.

[Doc Sportello]

48. Was it Jeff Dunham or some other comedian

who had a dummy where it would simulate a plane going over someone's head?

[Orrex]

17. Lots of people's fathers have died

And lots of people have had lives far more tragic than Liz. I'm sorry for her, but I'm much more sorry for people who didn't have vast legacy wealth and resources and title and the dubiously earned love of a nation to ease their pain.


The notion of "royals" is disgusting.

[Srkdqltr]

29. I really hope this is Sarcasm!!

[Orrex]

31. Nope. Not a word of it.

Every last royal in every nation can drop off the planet, and we'll be no worse off.

[Srkdqltr]

32. Sorry I meant that for #6.

[Orrex]

44. LOL! I've done that myself sometimes.

[malaise]

52. THIS

The Slobfather thinks he’s American royalty.

[Retrograde]

38. It happens to all our fathers - and mothers - eventually

And most people have to cope without becoming a monarch or inheriting a tax-free fortune - not to mention titles, staff and all the other trappings of a constitutional monarchy.

She was an adult at the time, with children of her own. A lot of her new subjects lost parents in the recent war and had to deal with it. Plus, the notion of hereditary monarchy had been ingrained in her from an early age: she knew it would happen eventually, unless she happened to die first.

[Effete Snob]

39. That is how EVERY monarch gets their title

Both my parents are dead. Nobody gave me a country.

The entire business of being the Princess or Prince of Wales, as she had been at the time, is waiting for one’s parent to die.

She had been raised from the time her uncle abdicated to know “when Dad dies, you’re queen.”

[NewHendoLib]

8. This. Bleechhh

[mopinko]

12. but but god said it was hunky dory.

everyone knows god started it.

[mopinko]

14. oh, and can i have my family's land back please.

[brooklynite]

15. "how lovingly the American media and populace drool over these elitist welfare recipients"

Would you care to go back and berate everyone here who doted over the Queen's Jubilee?

Last time I checked, the UK was a Democracy, and can keep or remove the Monarchy as they choose.

[Orrex]

19. As a matter of fact, yes. Fuck every second of that whole thing.

Asinine pageantry for people desperate to be ruled by their "betters."


And every single time you chime in on one of my posts, so eager to tell me that I'm wrong, that tells me that I'm correct.

Please continue.

[brooklynite]

21. I don't care...

Never cared about royalty one way or the other.

That said, it's been awhile since we've had a good "I hate X and so should you" post.

[Orrex]

26. Show me which post that is, and take it up with the person who posted it.

I'm not telling anyone who or what to hate. I'm simply asserting that the notion of royalty is disgusting, and the fawning worship of "royals" is asinine.

If people still wish to swoon over their figurehead rulers, well that's just super for them.

[XanaDUer2]

33. Well stated nt

[Grins]

9. C'mon! It was a charitable donation.

"Charitable donations received from Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim were passed immediately to one of the prince's charities, who carried out the appropriate governance and have assured us that all the correct processes were followed."

What he did was legal.

[malaise]

50. Huh?

Ask the Sunday Times and BBC why they think this is news
For the record my paternal aunt was heavily involved in social services for the Windrush generations. She’s have been locked of for one bag of cash let alone three.
I hate royalty- period

[Effete Snob]

53. What's the "Huh?"

What is it that is confusing?

The money was for the the Prince of Wales Charitable Foundation (PWCF). That's in the article you posted. It is from their accounts we know about it in the first place.

Among the causes supported by the PWCF is an Afro Caribbean social services group in the UK.

--------

https://housingcare.org/service/provider-24882-barnet-african-caribbean-association

BARNET AFRICAN CARIBBEAN ASSOCIATION: HOME SERVICES

We cater for the needs of the African and Caribbean elderly, Stroke and Alzheimer’s sufferers, as well as providing a “Home from Hospital” service.

--------

https://www.pwcf.org.uk/about-prince-waless-charitable-fund/our-impact/our-grantees

SOCIAL INCLUSION

Age UK Westminster

Alive Activities Ltd.

Asperger East Anglia

Autism NI

Barnet African Caribbean Association

------


I have no idea what this has to do with your aunt, but nobody did anything illegal. It is not illegal to travel with a lot of cash. It is illegal to travel with a lot of cash and not report it.

Obviously, he reported it, since that's how we know. From him and from the accounts of a registered UK charity which, among other things, supports Jamaicans.

Yes, I get it. There are people you hate and he is one of them because of who he was born. He isn't going to change and neither is your hatred. Do you also hate the people the money actually went to?

Let's all celebrate our hatred and the people we hate.

[malaise]

54. I don't care if the Charity is Afro-Caribbean

I care that the same rules apply to all. I won’t give a pass because my peeps are the beneficiaries.
Next time the cash could be for the National Front for all I know.

[Jirel]

13. Misplaced outrage.

The money was donated to one of his charities. Assuming he didn’t skim any off the top - and there is no such allegation - why do we care? Show us some evidence that he pocketed part of the donation, or it’s a non-story.

People give cash to charities all the time, though generally not in those quantities. Also by credit, cryptocurrency, in-kind products or services, check, unwanted vehicles, whatever. Nothing wrong with cash, as long as it’s not diverted.

[malaise]

27. You try that crap and get back to me

Why do you think this made the Sunday Times and BBC?

[Effete Snob]

42. Among the charities supported by the fund...

https://housingcare.org/service/provider-24882-barnet-african-caribbean-association

BARNET AFRICAN CARIBBEAN ASSOCIATION: HOME SERVICES

We cater for the needs of the African and Caribbean elderly, Stroke and Alzheimer’s sufferers, as well as providing a “Home from Hospital” service.

https://www.pwcf.org.uk/about-prince-waless-charitable-fund/our-impact/our-grantees

SOCIAL INCLUSION
Age UK Westminster
Alive Activities Ltd.
Asperger East Anglia
Autism NI
Barnet African Caribbean Association


——-

Anyone can transport large amounts of cash. There is a requirement to report it, which is why we know about this in the first place.

But, okay, Jamaicans should look elsewhere for help in the UK. Is that what you’re upset about?

[jalan48]

18. I'm surprised at the number of people here on DU who wet themselves over Royalty news.

Talk about white privilege.

[Orrex]

20. For real. Even in this thread.

[TreasonousBastard]

23. I suppose Qatari royalty should just burn the money, or buy new

toys, not give it away to charity. Kinda like US and Russian rich people do.

[Texasgal]

24. Meh..

The British seem to enjoy their Royals. *shrug*

[JCMach1]

25. Rich people paying cash is extremely common in the Middle East

Every semester at the university I taught, the parents lined at the bursar with their attache cases.

[Jedi Guy]

28. Why is this even a story?

Clarence House said donations from the sheikh were passed immediately to one of the prince's charities and all the correct processes were followed.
There is no suggestion the payments were illegal.

I'm sorry, but I don't see why this story is even a thing, let alone why it's outrageous. If ol' Chuck had kept the money that would be outrage-worthy. But he didn't, so... so what? Should he have told the sheikh to piss off? Would that have been preferable so people here felt better about it, even if it meant a charity went without a million-euro donation? Don't see how that's a better outcome.

[treestar]

56. It sells

There are enough people invested in it, including haters. I happened upon the haters of Duchess Meghan, they eat up anything about her no matter how trivial and use it to ascribe the worst motives they can think up. It is fascinating and appalling.

The publishers know there are haters of Charles, too, - Diana lovers hate Charles (and Camilla) and they too will assign bad motives to Charles somehow.

There are tons of trivial people out there, investing mightily in stuff like this.

[Jedi Guy]

60. Yeah, the Meghan Maulers will latch onto anything.

I'm all for criticizing her if it's warranted, but the headline could be "Meghan waves cheerfully at neighborhood children" and the Maulers would be out in force.

I just find the vitriol directed at the royals in general to be a bit puzzling, I guess. It's not as if they actually do anything these days. As an institution, they're essentially just one more thing for tourists to oooh and ahhhh over, but they do actually do some good in the world by being patrons of charities.

[Srkdqltr]

30. Why physical money? Don't they do wire transfers ?

[gldstwmn]

37. Good question. Surely he has a bank account?

I dunno, maybe there just a big vault somewhere with a bunch of different currencies in it. The whole thing is odd.

[xmas74]

41. Some Middle Eastern ppl proudly pay in cash.

I live in a college town. It wasn't uncommon to see the ME students arrive with their dads. Dad would pay tuition in cash. They'd pay a year of rent-in cash. They'd buy cars in cash.

I had a friend who was a real estate agent. She would tell us about how sometimes she'd get ME dads looking at houses for sale- one for the college kid and sometimes one for the family to use while visiting. She always mentioned one dad who stated he had three sons all wanting to study aviation so he planned on them all attending the same school. He offered to buy two houses with cash. Not wire transfer but straight up cash in hand.

It's just the way some do things.

[Hortensis]

35. Do all royalty do that? Do only royalty do that?

It's not picking at nothing. Smearing a tiny group like "royalty" reveals the difference between bigotry and disapproval of an individual's action just as surely as going after all Catholics because of Samuel Alito's behavior or all blacks because of Clarence Thomas's does. Fwiw, British royalty can live or disappear into history as their people choose because I'm neither for nor bigoted against enough to care.

[malaise]

36. I detest all royalty

That is all

[Hortensis]

45. :) I detest all people who detest all royalty, Malaise -- except you.

That Clarence Thomas married a white woman just shows even really hard core detesters can flex for individuals if they choose. (I think. Who knows what goes on in that mind?)

[malaise]

46. 😀😀

[Hortensis]

57. Lol, me neither. But royalty's other peoples' problem,

including nonsubscribing Canadians of course. Poor you. Know what you mean, though.

Long before Kennedy was assassinated when I was 10, I'd been seriously offended and repelled by the raptures over Camelot and "America's Royal Family." In our democracy! Genetically wired in, apparently, because no one around me cared a hoot either way. And watching others over decades made me realize both leader-need and subject traits must be missing altogether from my gene sequences.

[Hortensis]

59. :) Canada IS a great place. I wonder. Do you think having a royal family

helps divert some people from a need for a charismatic leader to subject themselves to? Authoritarian types? Maybe fewer prone to tRump or Bernie-type adoration, or to a lesser degree, because a (future King) Charles is built into the system?

[Hortensis]

62. Definitely will look up Pierre Poilivere, sounds like a real winner.

So, the answer's maybe probably not enough to help very much, especially for younger generations.

Btw, I don't see anything remotely authoritarian in your description of your own "hero worship." I'm an enthusiastic LBJ admirer and regretter also, a big favorites in part because of his big flaws to go with his great abilities and achievements. I was too young to vote for him but did get to see him.

The type I'm talking about ultimately commit to their chosen leader over/instead of the principles and issues they claim, giving the leader loyalty and obedience, the stronger the tendency the more unquestioning, unconditional and unshakable. We see it typically stronger and more dangerous in a large number of tRump followers, but no coincidence at all that a smaller proportion of Sanders' also wanted to remove their great man's opponent by having her imprisoned, an American Navalny. OR that roughly half of the strong authoritarians Sanders attracted moved to tRump after he was out.

Thinking about it, it seems obvious that British royalty would fail to meet the emotional needs of strong authoritarians at least, who specifically want strongmen leaders who'll smash their way to victory for them. (Authoritarians don't want to play well with others.)

[Journeyman]

47. I remember when he married Diana and we Irish lined the streets to shout in unison . . .

"Up Chuck and Di! Up Chuck and Di!"

[Hiawatha Pete]

51. Like I said in my reply to #45...

If MSM is so determined to spoon feed us royalty, then why does it always have to be the UK Royal family?

Other nations have Royalty, what about Harald V of Norway? What about Mswati III of Swaziland?

I'm sick & tired of hearing what Prince Charles had for breakfast.

I want to hear what Harald V or Mswati III had for breakfast.

[Totally Tunsie]

55. Maybe the real question is

"What did 'a former Qatari prime minister' receive in return?"

Quid pro quo, and all that...

[Kid Berwyn]

63. King Cash

When the Mob Ruled Havana

The true story of how gangsters sliced up Cuba and created an illicit playground

Cigar Aficionado | By T.J. English | From Kurt Russell, July/August 2019

In February of 1947, Frank Sinatra arrived in Havana, Cuba, holding a suitcase filled with $2 million in cash. He was flanked by two mobsters from Chicago, the Fischetti brothers, Rocco and Charlie.

Snip…

Weeks before Sinatra’s arrival, a who’s who of the American Mob had gathered in Havana for a major conference, presided over by Luciano and his closest gangster associate, Meyer Lansky. Sinatra’s cash delivery to Luciano constituted operational expenses for the Mob. Some of it would grease the wheels of corruption in the Cuban government; some of it would cover Luciano’s living expenses in Havana; and some of it would cover lavish meals for the mobsters as well as choice rooms at the Hotel Nacional, a Moorish/Sevillian/Art Deco palace perched on a bluff overlooking the aquamarine Gulf of Mexico.

The international star was but a bit player in this saga, the dimensions of which he likely knew little. The cash he had delivered was seed money for one of the most grandiose ventures the American Mob would ever undertake: to establish a base of operations in Cuba that would make it possible for organized crime to function as an international conglomerate. Fulfilling this plan would put the Mob beyond the reach of U.S. law enforcement.

Snip…

With Luciano out of the way, Lansky could begin to formulate the kind of operation he had in mind for Cuba, one that was based on casino gambling, which was his forte. Even so, it would take another five years for all of the pieces to fall into place. The man who made it possible—Lansky’s partner in the plundering of Cuba—was none other than the president himself, Fulgencio Batista.

Snip…

Throughout Cuba’s history, political turmoil was the norm. Presidents came and went at a stupefying rate. One president lasted five days in office. Others were toppled through military coups and violent uprisings. The military, not elected officials, emerged as the true power in Cuba. Which is why Lansky, as far back as 1933, set his sights on Batista.

According to Joseph “Doc” Stacher, a friend and associate of Lansky’s since their childhood together on Manhattan’s Lower East Side, he was present on a day in 1933 when Lansky presented Batista with multiple suitcases filled with cash. In later meetings, Batista was given a guarantee of $3 million to $5 million a year, in exchange for a monopoly on casino gambling. Batista was also promised a cut of the profits.

Continues…

https://www.cigaraficionado.com/article/when-the-mob-ruled-havana

Capitalism is how kings and the rich stay that way.

[malaise]

64. The Mob is still the mob by any other

title

[Joinfortmill]

65. I like Prince Charles, but this seems very, very strange. Why would he accept that?