PDA

View Full Version : Royal Wedding



TheBall'sRound
17-05-2008, 08:57 PM
I notice the daughter in law of Princess Anne had to convert (Catholic to Protestant) so that her husband doesn't rescind his right to the throne (what is he? 30th or something anyway?).

In the days of EU mandated Human Rights and employment regulations to guard against religious, gender and sexuality discrimination, is it beyond the bounds of reason to accept a Catholic in the royal family?

Or are the Stewarts just waiting for their chance...? :greengrin

fergal7
17-05-2008, 09:17 PM
NEVER...NEVER...NEVER.... Rev Ian Paisley Smilie

Pete
17-05-2008, 09:28 PM
The whole thing makes me mad. Seeing these people swanning about in Bentleys and living the high-life at everyone else's expense. They're no different to anyone else yet through pure chance they never have to do a real days work in their lives.

Why, as a society, do we accept this situation?

I'd line up all of these ponces and shoot them. I'd also include all of these old idiots who follow them about fawning over them bedecked in union flags. All of these "Royal commentators" should be included too. In fact, I'd take great pleasure in shooting some of them, especially that James Whittaker.

Prince Harry is the only one I'd save. At least he has some balls.

Wembley67
17-05-2008, 09:30 PM
The whole thing makes me mad. Seeing these people swanning about in Bentleys and living the high-life at everyone else's expense. They're no different to anyone else yet through pure chance they never have to do a real days work in their lives.

Why, as a society, do we accept this situation?

I'd line up all of these ponces and shoot them. I'd also include all of these old idiots who follow them about fawning over them bedecked in union flags. All of these "Royal commentators" should be included too. In fact, I'd take great pleasure in shooting some of them, especially that James Whittaker.

Prince Harry is the only one I'd save. At least he has some balls.

And that's why you will never be allowed to hold a firearms licence :cool2:

fergal7
17-05-2008, 09:44 PM
The whole thing makes me mad. Seeing these people swanning about in Bentleys and living the high-life at everyone else's expense. They're no different to anyone else yet through pure chance they never have to do a real days work in their lives.

Why, as a society, do we accept this situation?

I'd line up all of these ponces and shoot them. I'd also include all of these old idiots who follow them about fawning over them bedecked in union flags. All of these "Royal commentators" should be included too. In fact, I'd take great pleasure in shooting some of them, especially that James Whittaker.

Prince Harry is the only one I'd save. At least he has some balls.

Your too young to be so bitter. Try living in the 70's-80's when they were never out of the papers lording it over us.

I have never wished anyone death like I did back then.

Still feel that way.

Lucius Apuleius
18-05-2008, 05:37 AM
Mellowed in my old age, no longer wish them death, never wish that on any living soul. However still get rid of them.

Up the Republic!

Expecting Rain
18-05-2008, 09:24 AM
Kings and Queens belong to fairytales and SERVE no purpose in our everyday lives.

--------
18-05-2008, 02:01 PM
Lot of bitter people on these boards these days. :cool2:

Son of HorseWoman is 11th in line to the throne, so unless he does a "Kind Hearts and Coronets" job on Big-Ears and Co to the 10th generation, he's an irrelevance. As is the whole institution in the 21st century, IMO.


"All hereditary government is in its nature tyranny. To inherit a government is to inherit the people, as if they were flocks and herds...."

(Tom Paine: "The Rights of Man"; 1792)


Up the Republic! :devil:

The Leither
18-05-2008, 02:23 PM
There is always the question: if we god rid of the queen, who would you have as president? Why have anything? does a country really need a president?


get rid of the royals and the unelected house of lords!

elected and accoutable or nothing.

TheBall'sRound
18-05-2008, 02:39 PM
My point is that if they justify their existence by implying that being in the Royal Family is "a job" (public engagements etc) and don't forget, all laws passed in this country are subject to a (ceremonial) Royal Assent - shouldn't they be subject to the same discrimination laws as the other houses of government?

I think I may sue the Queen :greengrin

Scouse Hibee
18-05-2008, 05:03 PM
The whole thing makes me mad. Seeing these people swanning about in Bentleys and living the high-life at everyone else's expense. They're no different to anyone else yet through pure chance they never have to do a real days work in their lives.

Why, as a society, do we accept this situation?

I'd line up all of these ponces and shoot them. I'd also include all of these old idiots who follow them about fawning over them bedecked in union flags. All of these "Royal commentators" should be included too. In fact, I'd take great pleasure in shooting some of them, especially that James Whittaker.

Prince Harry is the only one I'd save. At least he has some balls.

So that's why there was so many union flags in Manchester this week, they were on their way to the wedding. :greengrin

LiverpoolHibs
19-05-2008, 03:50 PM
In the words of the great Billy Bragg, No Power Without Accountability.

hibsdaft
19-05-2008, 09:22 PM
Kings and Queens belong to fairytales and SERVE no purpose in our everyday lives.

:agree:

alex plode
19-05-2008, 09:58 PM
Your too young to be so bitter. Try living in the 70's-80's when they were never out of the papers lording it over us.

I have never wished anyone death like I did back then.

Still feel that way.

Remember the 70's & 80's well - but the sex pistols, punk ,falklands & Margaret Thatcher seemed to be in the papers more than royalty lording over the masses unless you mean Lord Lucan who was omnipresent but lording it somewher in the southern hemisphere .

Who did you want to kill anyway ?

AndyP
20-05-2008, 06:31 AM
There is always the question: if we god rid of the queen, who would you have as president? Why have anything? does a country really need a president?


get rid of the royals and the unelected house of lords!

elected and accoutable or nothing.

If you remove the unelected House of Lords you remove the system of parliamentary checks and balances. There have been a number of ill thought out Zanu Nu Labour bills that have only been stopped becoming law by the Lords.

stu in nottingham
20-05-2008, 03:57 PM
What a handsome bunch the royal wedding party were.

It was like looking into a hall of mirrors on the fair. :LOL:

JamieHibby
20-05-2008, 04:08 PM
What a handsome bunch the royal wedding party were.

It was like looking into a hall of mirrors on the fair. :LOL::rotflmao:

TheBall'sRound
20-05-2008, 05:01 PM
If you remove the unelected House of Lords you remove the system of parliamentary checks and balances. There have been a number of ill thought out Zanu Nu Labour bills that have only been stopped becoming law by the Lords.

I'm not going to say that the law lords and certain ex-parliamentarians aren't an asset to the "checks and balances" (Mr Foulkes a telling exception). The hereditary peers are a bit of a joke dating back to a time when they actually carried some responsibility to the areas of the country they inherited.

However, there should definitely be a more democratic method of deciding who is best suited to perform these checks and balances. Lord Archer anyone?

--------
20-05-2008, 05:03 PM
What a handsome bunch the royal wedding party were.

It was like looking into a hall of mirrors on the fair. :LOL:


It rather reminded me of ******'s wedding in "Addams Family Values".

Mind you, the Addams family's a lot less dysfunctional than that lot. :devil:

duncs
20-05-2008, 06:15 PM
If you remove the unelected House of Lords you remove the system of parliamentary checks and balances. There have been a number of ill thought out Zanu Nu Labour bills that have only been stopped becoming law by the Lords.

It's quite simple - you have elections for the House of Lords, however, they are for ten-year terms and you can only serve one term. Therefore there is no incentive to climb the greasy poll and you can serve and vote on matters of conscience, not party lines. Therefore issues that are neglected by the parties in the House of Commons because they can be divisive etc can be worked out in House of Lords committees.

ArabHibee
24-05-2008, 06:26 PM
The whole thing makes me mad. Seeing these people swanning about in Bentleys and living the high-life at everyone else's expense. They're no different to anyone else yet through pure chance they never have to do a real days work in their lives.

Why, as a society, do we accept this situation?

I'd line up all of these ponces and shoot them. I'd also include all of these old idiots who follow them about fawning over them bedecked in union flags. All of these "Royal commentators" should be included too. In fact, I'd take great pleasure in shooting some of them, especially that James Whittaker.

Prince Harry is the only one I'd save. At least he has some balls.

Care to expand on the reason for saving him coz if it's to do with him being a serving soldier you are having a laugh! :rotflmao:

Pete
24-05-2008, 09:05 PM
Care to expand on the reason for saving him coz if it's to do with him being a serving soldier you are having a laugh! :rotflmao:

That's part of it. He didn't have to fight on the front line but he did.

Falling out of nightclubs steaming...seen in the clutches of numerous young ladies...taking drugs..it's also blatantly obvious that he's not biologicaly related to the Windsors!

I'm trying to be sympathetic here but he's almost normal:tee hee:....unlike the rest of the prancing ponces.

ArabHibee
24-05-2008, 10:10 PM
That's part of it. He didn't have to fight on the front line but he did.

Falling out of nightclubs steaming...seen in the clutches of numerous young ladies...taking drugs..it's also blatantly obvious that he's not biologicaly related to the Windsors!

I'm trying to be sympathetic here but he's almost normal:tee hee:....unlike the rest of the prancing ponces.
If you can't see that as a publicity stunt, then I just don't know. He was nowhere near the front line and never in any danger. Please don't take my word for it, ask someone who is in the forces, they'll tell you how close he was to danger. :duck: My other half was in the Marines for 13 years and I never heard the end of it every time he was on the tv.:blah:

LiverpoolHibs
24-05-2008, 10:14 PM
That's part of it. He didn't have to fight on the front line but he did.

Falling out of nightclubs steaming...seen in the clutches of numerous young ladies...taking drugs..it's also blatantly obvious that he's not biologicaly related to the Windsors!

I'm trying to be sympathetic here but he's almost normal:tee hee:....unlike the rest of the prancing ponces.
You reckon? :confused:

ArabHibee
24-05-2008, 10:17 PM
You reckon? :confused:

:applause:Thank you - Don't believe the hype!!!

Pete
24-05-2008, 10:23 PM
I'd shoot him as well then...for lying!

ArabHibee
24-05-2008, 10:30 PM
I don't really have anything against the young lad -I just think he was misguided and shouldn't have been allowed to go to Afghanistan.
One of the girls in my work fiance was stationed where he turned up - he had 3 SAS soldiers with him at all times and the camp he was at was hardly "front line".
Saying that, I did watch one of his interviews and he did come across very well - I think him and his brother are a lot more grounded than most of the other royals - probably thanks to their mother (although I didn't have a lot of time for her either).
My view of the whole Royal family is they are a total waste of money and the sooner we get rid of them the better. Please don't start bleating on about the money tourism brings in, I'm no interested!!
Rant over! :dizzy:

LiverpoolHibs
24-05-2008, 11:00 PM
Ekaterinburg Mk. II. :duck:

ArabHibee
25-05-2008, 10:13 AM
Ekaterinburg Mk. II. :duck:

Had to look that one up Mr History - good one though!! :thumbsup:

Pretty Boy
25-05-2008, 10:57 AM
I'd love to see all these tax dodging, leeching ****bags taken out. I'm generally pretty respectful of human life but when it comes to these inbred half wits i get a tad angry.

The only one i would save is Prince Andrew because he seems the most arrogant of the whole shower, wouldn't mind watching him scrub my toilet, mop my floors and be my personal punchbag for a few years.

Onceinawhile
25-05-2008, 11:19 AM
another reason scotland should become independent. stop giving some of our taxes to these cretins.

really pisses me off that because of who their parents are they never have to work a day in their life. sickening

Phil D. Rolls
28-05-2008, 09:11 AM
Yeah, but why does the Royal Family have to be Protestant?

ArabHibee
28-05-2008, 12:33 PM
Yeah, but why does the Royal Family have to be Protestant?

Because Henry VIII said so? :confused:

Phil D. Rolls
28-05-2008, 12:34 PM
Because Henry VIII said so? :confused:

Not going to argue with him, he's been dead a long time, but he was still a big man.

steakbake
28-05-2008, 12:44 PM
Who are these people?? :bitchy::bitchy::dunno:

Phil D. Rolls
28-05-2008, 12:48 PM
Who are these people?? :bitchy::bitchy::dunno:

Dunno, they look like smileys to me - I didn't think they had names.

Huey, dewey and louie?
Larry, curly and moe?

The possibilities are endless.

steakbake
28-05-2008, 02:30 PM
Dunno, they look like smileys to me - I didn't think they had names.

Huey, dewey and louie?
Larry, curly and moe?

The possibilities are endless.

looks like three guys trapped in a lift. one of them has farted. the guy on the far end is denying it and the two others are shocked and appauled.

either way, one of them is not telling the truth.

never trust a smiley.

Phil D. Rolls
30-05-2008, 10:48 AM
looks like three guys trapped in a lift. one of them has farted. the guy on the far end is denying it and the two others are shocked and appauled.

either way, one of them is not telling the truth.

never trust a smiley.

They are so two dimensional aren't they?

Betty Boop
30-05-2008, 01:34 PM
Yeah, but why does the Royal Family have to be Protestant?:dunno: Don't think there has been a Catholic Prime Minister either, hence the reason Tony blair had to wait till he was out of Office before he converted.

Expecting Rain
31-05-2008, 09:04 PM
:dunno: Don't think there has been a Catholic Prime Minister either, hence the reason Tony blair had to wait till he was out of Office before he converted.

I think Tony has spent a bit of time in the confession box since his exit from Downing Street and it looks like it has paid off with his threat to unite the religions of the world, thank god for a bit of redemption.

JimBHibees
03-06-2008, 10:50 AM
I think Tony has spent a bit of time in the confession box since his exit from Downing Street and it looks like it has paid off with his threat to unite the religions of the world, thank god for a bit of redemption.

Read in the Sunday Herald that Blair had earned :greengrin £10m since his leaving No. 10. Incredible to be honest and just about sums the guy up.

TheBall'sRound
04-06-2008, 05:05 AM
Read in the Sunday Herald that Blair had earned :greengrin £10m since his leaving No. 10. Incredible to be honest and just about sums the guy up.

I think £10m is a small price to pay for WORLD PEACE!! :thumbsup::wink:

Incidentally, does Prince Harry sound like James Hewitt as much as he looks like him? Not that I'm implying anything you understand... The first burst of fresh genes for about 300 years of course.

Expecting Rain
04-06-2008, 10:08 AM
Read in the Sunday Herald that Blair had earned :greengrin £10m since his leaving No. 10. Incredible to be honest and just about sums the guy up.

Believe he`s keeping £10 million for his resurrection.