Comments by "Steve Parker" (@steveparker8065) on "'I’m so glad you’re safe here': King Charles meets Sudanese refugees" video.

What an inspiration the king is, such a philanthropist, egalitarian and down-to-earth monarch. A true man of the people whose family ruled Sudan via the British Empire as a condominium with Egypt up until 1956. Yes, the first part is sarcasm, He's just a man who talks to plants and has a decidedly dodgy charity...
5
@kevinb9830 He's responsible for his dodgy charity and the many scandals as well as profiting from his family's past. He inherited 3/4rs of a billion when the Queen died. That money is the family heritage/legacy/imperialism...
1
@kevinb9830 Try reason and logic, this isn't a case of absolutes this is a case of scale and amplitude. It's like comparing a fight down the pub with the genocide of a country... Either provide an intelligent rebuttal of my point or give up. Prince Charles is no innocent and his charity alone has cost the British taxpayer huge sums of money via fraud and tax avoidance and been accused of profiting from human trafficking of children. Charles as an individual has also cost the British taxpayer large amounts through less than legal activities.
1
@kevinb9830 Look up the words logic, nuance, reason and intellect. It seems you lack all of those things. Not interested in debating with a Feudal Sycophant. I'd rather try to teach a whale to fly...
1
@kevinb9830 You're defending fraud, tax avoidance and human trafficking and then claiming not to be a sycophant or royalist? Despite making arguments that are illogical and lack reason? Despite having no conception of nuance and correlation? I don't have time to argue with pedants, my time is precious and your contrarian nature bores me. I've had a wonderful, intelligent, enlightening and instructive debate, but this wasn't it!
1
@kevinb9830 What part of I'm not interested in your excuses, pedantry and contrary nature don't you understand? I've called you out on your lack of logic and reason. Would you debate someone who lacks the fundamental requisites? You are misinterpreting my comments to try and win a small point and extend this pointless circular debate. It's like trying to talk a trifle into sentience...
1