The Royals

*A BIGGER BUMP IN THE ROAD*

As those historic pictures were beamed back to earth, millions of us sat transfixed to our television screens, as we watched Neil Armstrong taking a small step for man and a giant leap for mankind -- and, indeed, for womankind. It’s a reminder for us all that giant leaps often start with small steps.
Click to expand...

This really summarised why she should be pensioned off ? political correctness madness
a bast*******n of his words ... and Armstrong should henceforth be reviled.

That was the biggest bump in the road - rather than that dummy, that, worrylingly attracted the press attention.

I thought a Windrush apology would have been approrpriate too , in the 'speech', but too political ?

Read Queen Elizabeth's 2019 Christmas Message Transcript About the Royal Family's Bumpy Year
 
'Prince' Andrew apparently sent out cards with a picture of a dogs rear, hopefully meaning that he's leaving the UK/Monarchy/earth(I can only wish), showing that he's still a petulant child that has learnt nothing but spite for being GIVEN every opportunity in his life - what a total disgrace he is..
 
Hmm. So what is about the royals that attract them to paedophiles?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...made-paedophile-bishop-peter-ball-impregnable
The disgraced paedophile bishop Peter Ball made himself apparently “impregnable” by cultivating friendships with Prince Charles and other senior establishment figures who later rushed to support him when he was accused of sexual abuse, according to a BBC documentary.

Ball, the former bishop of both Lewes and Gloucester who died last year, boasted of his role as “counsellor to royalty”, Cliff James, one of his victims, says in the programme. He cultivated friendships with Margaret Thatcher, peers of the realm, senior judges and headmasters of leading public schools.

The former bishop was investigated by police in the early 1990s, which resulted in a police caution. In 2015, he was convicted of sexual offences against 17 teenagers and young men and jailed for 32 months. He was released in February 2017 after serving half his sentence.

The second episode of the BBC’s two-part documentary, to be broadcast on Tuesday evening, draws on the testimonies of survivors and material and evidence given to the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse (IICSA), which conducted a case study into how the Church of England handled allegations against Ball.

James said Ball boasted of his connections. “He kept mentioning his friendship with Prince Charles in a flippant way, [as] anyone would talk about a friend – but he’s talking about Prince Charles,” he said.

“Here he was having a friendship with someone as low down as me … The next minute he’s dropping into the conversation, ‘oh, he’s counsellor to royalty’. It just reinforced his specialness and the idea he was impregnable.”
Click to expand...
 
Interesting that c4 are producing a programme about the BBC exploitation of Diana in that famous, presidential, interview,
proposition being, that they exploited a vulnerable individual for ratings where others turned down the story;
I think there is a pattern of this type of ill-advised tabloid behaviour in the BBC, Andrew being a subsequent example, where you can get a non-adept individual to say what you want.
https://inews.co.uk/culture/televis...el-4-docmentary-when-time-bbc-panorama-731425


With todays netflix shareprice hit due to low subscriptions,
I am wondering, if I will be enticed by the Meghans 'how they live expose' her netflix contract was reported to require - you did sell your sole to the devil, dear.
 
jpaul said:
Interesting that c4 are producing a programme about the BBC exploitation of Diana in that famous, presidential, interview,
proposition being, that they exploited a vulnerable individual for ratings where others turned down the story;
I think there is a pattern of this type of ill-advised tabloid behaviour in the BBC, Andrew being a subsequent example, where you can get a non-adept individual to say what you want.
https://inews.co.uk/culture/televis...el-4-docmentary-when-time-bbc-panorama-731425


With todays netflix shareprice hit due to low subscriptions,
I am wondering, if I will be enticed by the Meghans 'how they live expose' her netflix contract was reported to require - you did sell your sole to the devil, dear.
Click to expand...

Someone should tell her to put a sock in it.
 
jpaul said:
Interesting that c4 are producing a programme about the BBC exploitation of Diana in that famous, presidential, interview,
proposition being, that they exploited a vulnerable individual for ratings where others turned down the story;
I think there is a pattern of this type of ill-advised tabloid behaviour in the BBC, Andrew being a subsequent example, where you can get a non-adept individual to say what you want.
https://inews.co.uk/culture/televis...el-4-docmentary-when-time-bbc-panorama-731425


With todays netflix shareprice hit due to low subscriptions,
I am wondering, if I will be enticed by the Meghans 'how they live expose' her netflix contract was reported to require - you did sell your sole to the devil, dear.
Click to expand...

Does this come in English?
 
It's in queens english , and referring to well known historical media events ? a bit like the Nixon interview ... you're even more confused now ?
 
dirtybeatfreak said:
Not going to even entertain you, you're clearly just looking for an argument. It wasn't even you I called brainwashed, you quoted my message which was clearly for someone else just so you could take offence. Like I said, I never claimed to know it all, I just used common sense. Read the posts properly before getting on your high horse.

I'm out of this convo', carry on with your deluded vision that the Queen and Royal family are some evil lizard overlords or whatever. Enjoy.
Click to expand...

Had to come in just to laugh at this.

LOL

The guy goes at someone trying to create an argument, gets shown up for his childish attiitutde then says 'Im not playing anymore' THEN projects it onto someone else that they are trying to create an argument.

Be honest mate, I dont think you've thought critically about anything in your life, you just repeat the social consensus and you think that gives you the moral high ground.
 
CosmicClown said:
Had to come in just to laugh at this.

LOL

The guy goes at someone trying to create an argument, gets shown up for his childish attiitutde then says 'Im not playing anymore' THEN projects it onto someone else that they are trying to create an argument.

Be honest mate, I dont think you've thought critically about anything in your life, you just repeat the social consensus and you think that gives you the moral high ground.
Click to expand...

edit: not even going to humour you. Judging by your post history, you just enjoy arguing and not actually having any decent input into a discussion.

I will say you might want to try learning to read a little better. ;)
 
Last edited:
feedback on the funeral ? watched some of the BBC, Itv don't really have any competent presenters - ie. etchingham
nonetheless beeb roll out some stupid/crass coleman balls/cliches - he was in front of her for the first and last time, they've never been apart until now
- Surprised the wives didn't accompany the cortege - Camilla or Catherine
- Thought the appropriation of Nimrod was questionable.
- Didn't understand the drape with the castle ramparts on it.
- no fly past

edit: & was it a diesel? ev convert would have been clmate friendly .. no reg plates private land ?
 
Last edited:
I was glad that even on Twitter the ghouls stayed away and were respectful for the day.

@SPG don't bet on it, but i depends on the family. If Charles sits on the throne long term then yes it'll whine. But if he passes the crown quickly to William within a couple of years then we'll have a strong continuation for at least a couple of generations to come. I suspect Charles to pass the crown quickly because he doesn't seem interested at all and just wants to grow old with Camillia and be left alone.
 
jpaul said:
feedback on the funeral ? watched some of the BBC, Itv don't really have any competent presenters - ie. etchingham
Click to expand...

I was the opposite. I preferred the ITV coverage over the BBC. I couldn't stand Huw Edwards yapping on. He seemed to be talking just to fill the air. I'm not a fan of Tom Bradby either on ITV. But they seemed to be more active in having different interviews and let the cameras follow the ceremonies leading up to the funeral.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom