You may hear talks about all so sweet and dandy with the Norwegian Royal Family. The late King Harald who recently passed, was requested not to issue condolences to victims of Oct.7. Here a very short, but clear reason why. (1, tops 2 min, and you're way more informed than most) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/I8fFqrQDuZc ,,, still think the Norwegian Royal family is "100% symbolic, not at all political", as is ostensibly claimed?

Akhbar Yahoodi 😁 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNnuLaH50UU

I've wanted, but been unable to join in time to let you guys know, that the passing of our late king, will bring to the surface a national debate that has been simmering for a long time. The monarchic institution is inexorably legitimized in part via the royal family, and the numerous controversies, including among the many, the new Queen Mette Marit's very dubious connections to Jeffrey Epstein, are invariably forcing us to make some very difficult decisions. In my opinion, if I were to give only one reason to why I think we've arrived at this point, I would say it's because the ostensible notion of the monarchic institution being "just symbolic", when it's very demonstrably not indisputable, have left a grey-zone that too easily made it readily available for abuse. That is to say, I think the needed resolution, is explicit clearly defined political power, and subsequent accountability. Because the only way to keep it "just symbolic", is enacting punitive measures at the slightest form of political expression, and especially titular abuse for commercial gains. None of which have been adhered to, and evidently why there are many Norwegians who are not even willing to entertain any discourse. They either want to close their eyes and pretend the status quo in tenable indefinitely,,, or they are of those where there is nothing else but to dismantle the monarchic institution in its entirety. I'm not adamantly on one side or the other. My preference is to acknowledge that our monarchy was possible to retain in the manner that we did, because we are an ancient nation, who's history and prior national evolution have enabled us to have such an institution. It is one that can potentially offer us uncanny political flexibility when it comes to our national interests, among the highest legal instances like that of our "highest Court/Supreme Court". But it's jurisdiction must be clearly defined, with unmistakable over-arching objectives committed to national interest, for us to even consider harness such utility.

If you're familiar with 'Candid with Lubna', you may recognize 'Sir' Shoaib Sohail. And he nails it. Just a nicer way of saying why the UK just need to expand the Royal Navy's parameters for live target practice... maybe consider using their traitors as literal live rounds from the ships cannons https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YdptyiphqaU

How are we Iranians supposed to get behind this? We want our country liberated. That doesn't mean we want is partitioned. This is the gratitude we get for standing with Israel when no one else did?