cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Enter what you see:
This image contains a scrambled text, it is using a combination of colors, font size, background, angle in order to disallow computer to automate reading. You will have to reproduce it to post on my homepage Tip: Reload page if you have difficulty reading characters
Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Go to bottomPost New TopicPost Reply
TOPIC: Our beleaguered royalty...
#193723
Barney

Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months, 1 Week ago  
In a short few years, they've self destructed:-


Phil's car crash

His banishment to a Norfolk cottage


Harry marrying an American divorcee

Meghan's insistence to bring him to the US


What Andy's being doing, is being scrutinised

Epstein wasn't his only pal


Our next monarch might be nearly 80

And Camilla will be our gracious Queen


More consequences inevitable

With much more facts to enter the public domain



However - there's two royal weddings to look forward to...



 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193731
Bookworm

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months, 1 Week ago  
Camilla will never be Queen. Neither would Diana.

In the same way Prince Philip isn't King.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193735
Barney

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months, 1 Week ago  
Experts say that Camilla would be 'Queen in the legal and symbolic sense'

Or even called Queen - like Charles' grandmother was

When married to King George



 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193739
Barney

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months, 1 Week ago  
Bookworm wrote:
Camilla will never be Queen. Neither would Diana.

In the same way Prince Philip isn't King.



Philip was made a Prince, on his marriage to the sovereign.

At the very least, Camilla will be upgraded to Princess.


 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193744
Jo

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months, 1 Week ago  
I think Camilla will do a good job whatever she's called. She seems not to have put a foot wrong since she married Charles and gives the impression of being less self-obsessed and hungry for attention than Diana.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193748
Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months, 1 Week ago  
Meghan insisting on bringing Harry to the US?

How do we know this? Did they leave the mikes switched on?

All I see is a couple spending Christmas with one family or another, like everyone does.

Camilla will be queen whatever she calls herself and I think she will make a jolly good one.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193751
Green Man

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months, 1 Week ago  
Jo wrote:
I think Camilla will do a good job whatever she's called. She seems not to have put a foot wrong since she married Charles and gives the impression of being less self-obsessed and hungry for attention than Diana.


I wonder if old Charlie, still wants to be her tampon or live in her knickers ?

www.popsugar.com/celebrity/photo-gallery.../16023819/Tampongate
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193762
Barney

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months ago  
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Meghan insisting on bringing Harry to the US?

How do we know this? Did they leave the mikes switched on?


Our information on these two - like most Royal family matters - comes mainly from the media.

Although Harry has publically expressed a desire to live in another country - on a few occasions, in recent times.

This month, Vanity Fare, The Sun and Observer (amongst others) reported that H&M were house hunting in Malibu.

But only time will tell. And perhaps - the ongoing media coverage of Harry's uncle will affect Harry's views.

Christmas visits by the pair will be closely scrutinised; Malibu is very convenient to LAX.


 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193764
hedda

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months ago  
They are "beleaguered" because of a rampant gutter media (95% of it in the UK) who parrot, PARROT endlessly because they don't think they can be left out, they are so bloody lightweight they actually think an election is about whether you like Granddad or Loveable Buffoon ( fuck policy) and so on.

The Royals will survive.

Prince Charles will become a beloved King. Not sure what role Camila will take (she'd arther stay at home anyway).

They have to survive or Britain can say goodbye to half it's Tourism Industry.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193770
Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months ago  
Barney wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Meghan insisting on bringing Harry to the US?

How do we know this? Did they leave the mikes switched on?


Our information on these two - like most Royal family matters - comes mainly from the media.

Although Harry has publically expressed a desire to live in another country - on a few occasions, in recent times.

This month, Vanity Fare, The Sun and Observer (amongst others) reported that H&M were house hunting in Malibu.

But only time will tell. And perhaps - the ongoing media coverage of Harry's uncle will affect Harry's views.

Christmas visits by the pair will be closely scrutinised; Malibu is very convenient to LAX.




Well yes, but it was Harry who expressed a wish to leave,not his wife. I hope they do whatever makes them happy. Stay or leave, it wont make much difference.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193774
Barney

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months ago  
Most would agree, I think, that Meghan wants to maintain her links with the Clooney/Hollywood/Los Angels set; they attended her wedding.

And Malibu (less than 30 miles from LAX) to Frogmore (-10 miles from LHR) isn't too onerous a trek - to undertake, a few times a year.

The media would suggest that - apart from seeing Mom - there's another angle to H&M's Christmas trip, house hunting. Neither seem to be too happy here, at the moment.


 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193779
Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months ago  
Barney wrote:
Most would agree, I think, that Meghan wants to maintain her links with the Clooney/Hollywood/Los Angels set; they attended her wedding.

And Malibu (less than 30 miles from LAX) to Frogmore (-10 miles from LHR) isn't too onerous a trek - to undertake, a few times a year.

The media would suggest that - apart from seeing Mom - there's another angle to H&M's Christmas trip, house hunting. Neither seem to be too happy here, at the moment.




I dont understand why it is considered a bad thing for her to maintain links with the Hollywood crowd if they are her friends? Why wouldn't she?
It doesn't make her the manipulative monster that the papers sometimes imply that she is.

If they really do feel unsupported, as reports suggest, they should just go. There is no reason for them to stay, and there are enough other minor royals who could take on some of their work, if needed.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193782
Barney

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months ago  
Maybe it's because - when the last American divorcee married into the Royal family - it caused a constitutional crisis.

Wallis married our King - and wished to maintain her links in Palm Springs and Manhattan; Edward and Wallis had a permanent suite at the Waldorf Astoria.

It didn't end well. Harry is a senior member of the firm, and people will expect him to do his duty. After all, the Frogmore refurbishment was funded by taxpayers.

Taxpayers also fund a large portion of his lifestyle, and that of his American wife.

Surely Harry isn't going to attempt to have it both ways - in two different countries, continents and cultures.



 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193786
Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months ago  
Barney wrote:
Maybe it's because - when the last American divorcee married into the Royal family - it caused a constitutional crisis.

Wallis married our King - and wished to maintain her links in Palm Springs and Manhattan; Edward and Wallis had a permanent suite at the Waldorf Astoria.

It didn't end well. Harry is a senior member of the firm, and people will expect him to do his duty. After all, the Frogmore refurbishment was funded by taxpayers.

Taxpayers also fund a large portion of his lifestyle, and that of his American wife.

Surely Harry isn't going to attempt to have it both ways - in two different countries, continents and cultures.





But they are not Edward and Mrs Simpson,even if he looks exactly like him, sounds exactly like him and has the exact same mannerisms, and Meghan is the dead spit of Wallis.

They can make their own mistakes soon enough without being pre-judged for things that happened long before they were born.


Why shouldn't Harry have it both ways? If he can do good work in both places and be happy, that must be a positive thing?
We dont actually need to pay him if he is not actively working, not that I begrudge it.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193793
Barney

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months ago  
When living in Southern California, Harry would find it very difficult to fulfil his numerous roles. Commuting is not a credible option.

These include - Captain General of the Royal Marines; Lieutenant General of the Royal Navy; Squadron Leader of the RAF; Patron of the Invictus Games.

And many more. Harry has to make decisions about his future - it's impossible to play for Arsenal and a West Coast baseball team, at the same time!


 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#193794
hedda

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Months ago  
Andrew must be thinking "THANK GOD ! what a fu**ing relief!"

He's nearly 60..no more unbelievably intensely boring "dignitaries" to meet..no insufferably boring events to have to attend.

A life of leisure beckons ..a bloody nice apartment in Kensington Palace..an unbelievably rich Mum who'll sling her favorite plenty of pocket money...what's not to like?

This drama will blow over. He'll still be courted by the immensely rich and have a life of fabulous holidays on people's yachts, flights in their private jets, dinner invites with celebs etc with no strings attached. ( such notoriety now is like a blessing)
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#194879
Barney

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Weeks, 4 Days ago  
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Meghan insisting on bringing Harry to the US?

How do we know this? Did they leave the mikes switched on?


No Honey - but so obvious.

Wrapped around M's little finger (or ambition) is H.


Godfather to Clooney's offspring next.

Maybe H doesn't know it yet!



 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#194899
PaulB

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Weeks, 3 Days ago  
Over the centuries, the British Family have been through far worse and survived. They stay in place with the love and blessings of the majority of the public, despite the small but vocal minority who don't like them.
Both Andrew and Philip are bigger than their critics, and have certainly done more to serve the nation, including putting their lives on the line. Harry fell in the love trap, like his great great uncle.

Cromwell abolshed the Royal Family, but it was restored by the will of the people .. who dug up the remains of Cromwell and hung them along with a few of the remaining republicans.

The Royal Family will be staying in place for a few more generation yet.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#194903
Bookworm

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Weeks, 3 Days ago  
The royal family have suffered at the worst hands of the press and on top of it, they are slandered and vilified by idiots.
It isn't right or fair.

Nobody will bring them down. The press are stirring the mire though — as they do and it is upsetting them.
An outright ban on royal reporting will likely be the end result in that respect.

The media claimed yesterday that the pair were stepping back as seniors, but I don't think it is permanent.
They want to spend time with their child (understandable) and will be back to it on a reduced level. Kate, Meghan, and Andrew are treated appallingly in the press.
I don't have any time for those who allow it.

Forget the old press adage about "We are just reporting the news."
No, they have gone beyond the pale decade after decade.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#194904
wyot

Re:Our beleaguered royalty... 2 Weeks, 3 Days ago  
Cromwell became more oppressive than Charles I ever had and the monarchy was restored - in the 17th century - to avoid this and to cement clear Royal succession rather than more civil war over disputed lineages...

Doesn't really pertain to now in any way.. as The Royal family has no power, and no one is going to shed blood over the succession of Elizabeth II...
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
Go to topPost New TopicPost Reply