Welcome, guest. Register to remove this message!

[Ravage]

So, what do you think about the constitutional crisis the swedes have almost had as a result of a couple of more or less authentic party pictures of their monarch?

[Ravage]

So, what do you think about the constitutional crisis the swedes have almost had as a result of a couple of more or less authentic party pictures of their monarch?

No one? Not even norwegians who want to poke their noses at the swedes?

[Groundsplitter]

So, what do you think about the constitutional crisis the swedes have almost had as a result of a couple of more or less authentic party pictures of their monarch?

There has been much more to this than just the photographs. The photo itself will be published in January in a book by a gangster/porn club owner, and shows the king at this (or one of these) clubs, looking at scantily clad women involved in some sex act.

Experts claim today that the photograph has been manipulated, but the photo is just one detail in a series of compromising indications (I don't want to call it evidence) against the king. It started(?) with a biography on the king written last year by a couple of journalists, in which they described the king's wild party life in the past (the 1970's I suppose) - a life that included mistresses and visits to strip clubs run by a known gangster, and so on. What's quite noteworthy is that when the gangster/strip-club owner confirmed these visits and claimed that he had photographs to prove it, it made the king and his friends quite nervous, and one of the king's friends, one Anders Lettström, even contacted the gangster to buy the photographs from him and to deny the book's statements. When Lettström's contact with the criminal elements became known, the king denied knowing anything about it, but tape recordings made by the criminals show that Lettström claims that the king knew about these contacts. Lettström first denied that it was his voice, but later admitted that it was him, but he now claims that he was just telling the criminals the things that he thought that they wanted to hear...

The king's and his friends' behaviour here is very strange - if all the photos are indeed fake as the experts claim that the first leaked photo is (the gangster says that he has more; this first one will be included in a book published in January 2012), how come that the statements caused him/them to become so nervous? Why go to such extremes to try to buy back a photo unless you have reason to believe that they are real?


The king's wild party life back in the 1970's, before he married Silvia Sommerlath, is actually quite well-known so I don't think anyone denies that part. The question is how discerning he was - whether he only visited legal establishments, or if he visited other clubs as well, and in the latter case, on how good terms he was with the people running those clubs.

Me, I just enjoy seeing the king take as much flak as possible. Anything that lowers the people's opinion of the royal family is useful and very welcome. If you ask what I believe, then I'm quite positive that there's a lot of truth in book's and the gangster's claims.

[Ravage]

So, what do you think about the constitutional crisis the swedes have almost had as a result of a couple of more or less authentic party pictures of their monarch?

Me, I just enjoy seeing the king take as much flak as possible. Anything that lowers the people's opinion of the royal family is useful and very welcome. If you ask what I believe, then I'm quite positive that there's a lot of truth in book's and the gangster's claims.

Here I agree, I am a sworn republican, but after seing the type of ludicrous scandals the norwegian royal house gets away with I have lost all hope that anything that the royals themself might instigate could ever turn the people against them :/

Concerning the partying life of the swedish king, I think the real advantage point he has is that the gangster has no argument for waiting 30-40 years with releasing the photos. If they were real, wouldnt he have used them for blackmail at a much earlier date?

[Gemini Prime]

One one hand I am glad (very glad in fact) that the monarch gets his feathers ruffled, on the other hand I am disappointed that its due to some sleazy scandal. There is no evidence to prove that these claims are true regardless of the behavior of the monarchs friends even if I hope that will change. I wish that there would be a discussion regarding the outdated and downright immoral ways our constitution works when it comes to the House of Royals. I want the monarchy shut down for good for three reasons.

1: Its wrong to receive millions of kronor (our taxes) in support without the parliament deciding what the money can be spent on or finding out if they have been spent accordingly. The fact that the average citizen can can loose financial aid or even get into trouble with the law just by filling in a form incorrectly just makes it worse.

2: Its very wrong to inherit an official title without any demands on qualifications or asking for the peoples support, either directly through an election or indirectly through parliament or the government. We discussed monarchy vs a republic on a separate thread on our forum and I won't repeat myself too much. But I will say that I still think its outdated, wrong and risky to let the title of Head of state to be inherited based on some insane and inaccurate understanding on how genetics work.

3: its very, very wrong for anyone to be above the law. The monarch can not be tried in a court of law nor can he (or she) be convicted of a crime. I don't even think the authorities can investigate him properly (why would they, it won't lead to anything). It sometimes baffles me when people compare the US to Sweden and have opinions on how horrible the american justice system is. To be fair much of the critique is valid but the US, at the very least have a constitution that states that no one is above the law. Sweden doesn't even have that and regardless on how inhuman the american justice system can be at its very worst there is still a whiff of hypocrisy in the air when you judge before you "cleaned up your own house" (not that it should hold you back from speaking out against things that you find wrong).

I can't think of a single reason to keep the monarchy and its supporters are just talking out of their arse. The claim that the monarch represents Sweden internationally is exaggerated since very few outside of Scandinavia even know who our monarch is (most hardly know who we are). The same goes for the claim that he helps swedish companies and industries. There are several countries around the world who do just fine without a monarch (I don't see Germany suffer).

Then we have the claim that we should keep the monarchy to remember our history and I find that equally ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, I do think we must remember our history (especially the scientifically proven facts of that history) but when it comes to Sweden's 1000 year run as a monarchy its very important to remember that we spent some 900 of those 1000 years under a dictatorship. Sometimes the dictator was more kind and other times less kind but it was a dictatorship none the less. I find it absurd to keep the descendants of these dictators in some sort of "natural reserve" where they can live in luxury and above the law just to "remember our history".

The monarchy still holds a strong support in Sweden but I don't think that many swedes actually support the current system. I can not bring myself to believe that some 60% of the population actually think that its good for someone to inherit an official title or be above the law. I do however think that these 60% like the royal family on a personal level (despite that they don't know them) and find the royals to be nice and decent people. But even if we where to loose our monarchy the people will still be here. The king (and his family) would still be around, he may even keep his title in the same way as other nobles have kept their titles. You won't even loose touch with them and can still read about them in papers as long as there is an interest from the public.

This post has been edited by Gemini Prime: 16 December 2011, 21:42

[NRJohn]

So, what do you think about the constitutional crisis the swedes have almost had as a result of a couple of more or less authentic party pictures of their monarch?

In all honesty, I don't care. Any such pictures, authentic or not, are of no interest to me. If something illegal has taken place then that’s another matter. Otherwise it won’t change my perception of the monarchy in it self. As for wasting tax money…well there’s plenty of other great examples of that: JAS, SAAB, nuclear waste disposal or the Halland’s ridge tunnel…but that’s another topic.

[Protek]

As for wasting tax money…well there’s plenty of other great examples of that: JAS, SAAB,

Well, can't really comment on the Gripen (that's what it's called, JAS is just the type) but whatever SAAB is going through, you can blame it on General Mistakes. I personally want to see SAAB continue making cars. But, as you said, that's another topic.

This post has been edited by Protek: 17 December 2011, 00:25

[Ravage]

As for wasting tax money…well there’s plenty of other great examples of that: JAS, SAAB,

Well, can't really comment on the Gripen (that's what it's called, JAS is just the type) but whatever SAAB is going through, you can blame it on General Mistakes. I personally want to see SAAB continue making cars. But, as you said, that's another topic.

Or to blame it on the swedish government for not simply buying up this piece of national industry? Instead of stripselling it to the chinese?

[Ravage]

Then we have the claim that we should keep the monarchy to remember our history and I find that equally ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, I do think we must remember our history (especially the scientifically proven facts of that history) but when it comes to Sweden's 1000 year run as a monarchy its very important to remember that we spent some 900 of those 1000 years under a dictatorship. Sometimes the dictator was more kind and other times less kind but it was a dictatorship none the less. I find it absurd to keep the descendants of these dictators in some sort of "natural reserve" where they can live in luxury and above the law just to "remember our history".

not to mention that your royal house is not the original one, but the sons of a french tavern-owner. Making it even more ridiculous to retain them as historical "artifacts"

[obsidian x]

Anything that potentially weakens the monarchy is a big + in my book. Bring on the scandalous pics if they exist (I hope they do).