Isn't the Queen a war criminal too?

Go and learn about the power the Queen holds over the military, real power, not symbolic and then come back. It strikes me that a great deal of the current shortcomings of the protest movement are related to the lack of a common target or goal. Introducing another, placebo target does nothing but dilute the movement further.

Anon's misuse of language certainly weakens that case. It could be enough to justify hiding. However, the power of the Monarch is entirely derived from the Oath of Loyalty all the Armed Services take to serve the Monarch faithfully. The Monarch has taken Oaths to serve the People, and provides a channel for the orderly exchange of power according to election results. The Monarch cannot be blamed for the Stupidity of the People electing Blair.

The real question is will the Crown do its duty when in a General Election most people do not vote. That will be a Democratic rejection of the whole Political System, and the proper respose for a Constitutional Monarch would be to declare a State of Anarchy, and instruct all those Service people who have sworn loyalty the Crown to defend and maintain that State of Anarchy until the next election.

Until the Monarch fails in that duty, no Democrat has any reason to denounce the Crown. When the Monarch breaks the Oath to the People, then all the Armed Services wil have to reconsider the validity of their own Oath to the Monarch.

Ho Ho Ho!

The Queen has to give authorisation for any treat, law, or decission made by parliament. She signed for the Iraq war as for all other wars this glorious country has engaged in. She's also handed out medals of honour to murdering scum such as generals, and soldiers who invaded various lands in her name. Who can forget the soldier scum (SS) who murdered 13 people in NI during bloody sunday and were greeted with medals and handshakes by this symbol of democracy which is none other than our fuhrer ze queen.

To the gallows with the lot of them