|
Just heard the duke is in hospital again.He is ninety two time to put his feet up.Some of us might say he has had a easy live but old age catches all of us.
|
NHS hospital in Aberdeen.
Get the black ties out.
|
|
I hope not. I quite like him and he seems to have done a good job supporting his wife, who I like a lot.
|
|
He's irreverent and ever young in spirit. I hope he bounces back, as he always has. Yet the reality is his age and the fact that mortality catches up with us all - but not yet, please - not yet!
Last edited by: FocalPoint on Wed 15 Aug 12 at 16:47
|
|
I agree FM2R - he's one of the royals I warm to. Gaffs and all. I hope it is only a precaution but he's getting on a bit. Time to slow down a bit and not do so many engagements.
|
|
Is that a comment on the quality of the Scottish health service?
|
Just T-I-C.
If I actually had something serious wrong with me, a private hospital is one place I'd not be headed for.
|
>> If I actually had something serious wrong with me, a private hospital is one place
>> I'd not be headed for.
>>
If you have something seriously wrong, then NHS in England too is fantastic - but only once you have overcome the three hurdles of the receptionist, the GP, and the waiting list.
:~
|
....and Hadrians Wall.
Pat
|
>> and the waiting list
Don't worry that'll be getting bigger now the boys-in-blue are back in charge.
When I started in the late 90s some people were waiting 100 weeks for hip replacements.
By 2010 it was more like 8-12 weeks.
And by serious I mean immediately life-threatening as opposed to "would be nice to have" stuff.
|
>> Don't worry that'll be getting bigger now the boys-in-blue are back in charge.
>>
I wonder if you therefore believe that the outcome would have been better under the boys-in red who had at the last election promised to spend LESS on the NHS than the blue brigade.
The NHS is black hole which has a capacity to consume more and more (due to factors such as obesity in the young, old-age in the old, increasing population). Combined that with a declining economy and you can see why the NHS's appetite for resources will never be satisfied, whichever colour party is in power.
|
>>I wonder if you therefore believe that the outcome would have been better under the boys-in red who had at the last election promised to spend LESS on the NHS than the blue brigade.
Unfortunately the issue with the NHS is that they can put another billion pounds into it but not one penny of that will necessarily reach patient care.
|
>> Unfortunately the issue with the NHS is that they can put another billion pounds into
>> it but not one penny of that will necessarily reach patient care.
>>
The experience of the Welsh NHS which has been controlled by Labour for over 10 years now proves your point.
The Scots NHS can't be trusted to be doing any better either -
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-17457913
"NHS Lothian was marking patients as unavailable to artificially reduce the number in breach of the statutory waiting times guarantees.
The board offered treatment in England at short notice and recorded them as unavailable if they did not travel.
NHS Lothian apologised "unreservedly" for the "unacceptable" practices."
|
I wouldn't be surprised if a number of other Boards either side of the border are currently sweeping similar practices under the carpet to avoid missing out on valuable knighthoods.
|
>>Don't worry that'll be getting bigger now the boys-in-blue are back in charge.<<
Oh I dont know though, ive heard 'theres no more we can do for you' twice in as many years. Great way to save money by just not treating people, cant think why they didnt think of it before.
|
>Don't worry that'll be getting bigger now the boys-in-blue are back in charge.<
I thought for a moment that the Police had been put in charge of the NHS !
|
>> Is that a comment on the quality of the Scottish health service?
>>
2 years ago I was some 6 weeks away from checking out. I reckon they spent £100K on me and only once did the subject of ££s come up - the "pain nurse" had a sharp intake of breath when a certain pain killer @ £30 each was prescribed by the consultant!
Now I am well, I get called in every 6 months/12 months for scans, blood checks and every one is 1st Class...........even the surgeon who is English! He is a top man...........he said no hurry, we will stabilise you and operate when I come back from holiday.........getting it right is better than acting in haste.
|
If the Duke becomes serially poorly it may hasten a change at the top.
I have the impression that in the mind of the Queen his wellbeing is the only thing that seriously competes with her duty as monarch.
|
>> If the Duke becomes serially poorly
>>
reports now say it is a recurrence of the bladder infection.
|
|
Hopes he is well again soon, he may be from another era, but its an era of duty and selfnessless that I shall miss when its gone.
|
I agree.
I wish him well.
I'd like to see the Queen and Prince Philip retire and enjoy some quality time with their family.
I'd like to see Charles fulfil his destiny and take over, albeit for a relatively short time, and then I'd like to see William take over, hopefully for a long time, whilst in his prime.
|
|
Charles YES. His Horse...........NO.
|
Fortunately for the latter-day Wallis Simpson the peasants don't have a choice.
|
|
Noted Sire.
Last edited by: Martin Devon on Wed 15 Aug 12 at 20:09
|
Uh oh, I spoke to soon - here comes the peasants....
This.... is.... FAAARRRRAAAAHHH!!
tinyurl.com/clf4n8m
|
"His Horse"?
Do I assume you mean his wife? Well, I'm going to assume that, so feel free to ignore me and accept my apologies if I'm wrong.
Do you know her? If so, what did she do to you to deserve such a term? If you don't know her, then why do you call her that? Are you copying someone you admire? Does it make you feel clever to be mean and insulting about someone like that?
Would you have any particular feelings if I abused your partner in that way?
A little bit juvenile and "playground", don't you think?
From what little I personally know she seems like a very pleasant lady to me. But then, I actually don't read the Sun.
|
When he was born they were still making Ford Model T's (in fact when my grandma was born they were still making them!).
I don't have much time for the royals either way (e.g I have no opinions) but I wish him well.
|
|
What change indeed that generation saw in transport in particular. My father was born shortly after the Wright brothers first managed to fly a powered aircraft and yet by the end of his working life he was regularly using the Edinburgh - London shuttle flights and what's more I remember as a child being allowed to stay up to sit with him to watch Neil Armstrong getting out for a bit of a stroll.
|
Reckon my grandfather (now dead) tops that.
When he first went to school, powered flight was still a dream, yet man flew to the moon, strolled about a bit and the space shuttle was launched before he died.
He fought in the First World war, was on the searchlight team that illuminated the first Zepplin to be shot down in the UK. Motoring wise he crashed a tram, broke the back axle of an Austin 7 in the general strike due to overloading, kept a car in his garage all through the second world war and sold it when peace broke out for enough to by the new car he got about a year later.
|
...From what little I personally know she seems like a very pleasant lady to me...
Camilla seems to have fitted in well, and - latterly at least - gained some popularity with the public.
It was noticeable the Queen chose Camilla to 'replace' the Duke at her side when he was last ill.
|
>>A little bit juvenile and "playground", don't you think?<<
+1
|
>> "His Horse"?
>>
>> Do I assume you mean his wife? Well, I'm going to assume that, so feel
>> free to ignore me and accept my apologies if I'm wrong.
>>
>> Do you know her? If so, what did she do to you to deserve such
>> a term? If you don't know her, then why do you call her that? Are
>> you copying someone you admire? Does it make you feel clever to be mean and
>> insulting about someone like that?
>>
>> Would you have any particular feelings if I abused your partner in that way?
>>
>> A little bit juvenile and "playground", don't you think?
>>
>> From what little I personally know she seems like a very pleasant lady to me.
>> But then, I actually don't read the Sun.
>>
OH! dear, you are upset sweetie, bad day or what? Shame he'd not given his first wife a bit more attention though. Well that's what happens with arranged marriages. I actually like the Guy immensely, but do not care for his new other half. Just my bigoted view. As for my choice of paper you couldn't be more wrong. 15 all!
|
Did you not understand my questions, or could you just not come up with anything to say about them?
>but do not care for his new other half
I didn't even realise you'd met her.
You would appear to be a fool.
|
As figureheads and for attracting tourists I think they're a good idea.
Equally I'm happier for the Armed Forces to be loyal to the Crown as a representative of the nation, rather than some PM or President politician.
But don't for a second think that they have more morals, compassion, or humanity than the rest of us.
In saying that the Queen stands head and shoulders above them all for steadfastness and sense of duty (even though she's about 4 feet tall) - I wouldn't want her job for all the tea in London.
|
>>I wouldn't want her job for all the tea in London.
Quite a lot of fringe benefits mind. Great expenses account for example.
:-)
|
Shame he'd not given his
>> first wife a bit more attention though.
I think he bit off more than he could chew there...she was somewhat unhinged.
I'm not saying Charlie was a saint...but...the more true side of him has come out eventually, he wasn't the big bad wolf he was portrayed to be.
|
People think these people are aunt sallies FMR. It makes them feel powerful and clever to badmouth people they don't know but who are cast by fate, and the tabloid media, as popular playthings.
Vulgar. Pathetic. Irresponsible. But what do you expect of vox pop? Tchah!
|
Bit unfair Martin. I suspect Camilla Shand was the love of his life but, perhaps because she'd been around the block as it were, didn't suit the courtiers. Eventually she got tired of waiting and married someone else.
Diana Spencer fitted the bill biologically but couldn't cope with the role.
Life's not as simple as it seems.
|
>>Diana Spencer fitted the bill biologically but couldn't cope with the role.
The role consisting of being married to a man who loved someone else, having his kids, and being expected to keep on smiling.
|
>> The role consisting of being married to a man who loved someone else, having his
>> kids, and being expected to keep on smiling.
>>
Standard job description for a Princess Consort??
|
Let's see what the Duchess of Cambridge thinks of that plan ;-)
|
...Let's see what the Duchess of Cambridge thinks of that plan...
She, like Diana, seems to have been very keen to take on the role.
Let's hope it ends more happily for her.
|
>> Let's see what the Duchess of Cambridge thinks of that plan ;-)
>>
The world has, to a degree, moved on. Even the courtiers recognise that sowing one's wild oats while marrying a girl who's virgo intacto on the wedding day is a contradiction. Like the rest of us Kate & Wills lived 'over t'brush' before their nuptials. Hopefully they'll endure but if they don't we might just be able to move on??
|
|
Shame this has revived again, but seeing Wills and Harry together quite a bit during the Olympics made me wonder if they were from the same set of parents...
|
I get them mixed up, but doesn't one have his mother's looks and the other his father's brains?
|
|
I thought they were both pretty good types, there was an interview (was it with Sue Barker?) where there was some jolly joshing going on, they seemed OK.
|
|
He's an elderly man, he should be allowed to retire. R4 news was fawning over him earlier in a most peculiar way. He should be allowed some privacy. I'd be mightily pee'd off if the whole world was privy to my illnesses. I have always had the impression that he's not a particularly nice man at all and he gets away with a lot because of who he is. His older sons seem to have inherited the obnoxious genes in varying degrees.
Last edited by: R.P. on Wed 15 Aug 12 at 23:00
|
|
>>I'd be mightily pee'd off if the whole world was privy to my bladder problems.
|
... I'd be mightily pee'd off...
Appropriate choice of phrase, given the nature of the illness.
|
>>He's an elderly man, he should be allowed to retire <<
Having watched the few interviews with him, it would appear it is he who wont 'retire'.
|
>>. I have always
>> had the impression that he's not a particularly nice man at all and he gets
>> away with a lot because of who he is. His older sons seem to have
>> inherited the obnoxious genes in varying degrees.
I have always had the impression he is a very straightforward principled man whose principal "fault" is a tendency to say what he's thinking.
|
>>The role consisting of being married to a man who loved someone else, having his kids, and being expected to keep on smiling.<<
And rolling about in the hay with other men. She was no angel and the high regard in which she is still held often seems misplaced. She was not well regarded within the circles her family moved.
Its amazing that between them they produced two rather well adjusted young men.
|
Despite their human failings, I don't think I've seen reports of Chaz'n'Di not loving their children.
And the nannies maybe helped too.
Edit - and as for her rolling in the hay with other men - this appears to have begun after she knew the fairy tale was over and Chaz was still knobbing Camilla.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Wed 15 Aug 12 at 23:02
|
>>and as for her rolling in the hay with other men - this appears to have begun after she knew the fairy tale was over and Chaz was still knobbing Camilla <<
Apparently, but then nobody really knows, even the Royals have secrets. In the absence of truth, people pick a side and fit the facts to it as they wish.
|
>>She was no angel and the high regard in which she is still held often seems misplaced
I was in Miami when she died, I think. And within the last week before she died the Sun or Mirror had headlines about how awful her behaviour was, and how it was yet another man, speedboat in the sun, I seem to recall. etc. etc.
1 week later she was the "people's princess" and the "Princess of Hearts".
What complete and utter dross. She was no more evil and no more innocent than many another female in that position. Or man for that matter.
|
Sun and Mirror headlines don't count for a lot in my opinion.There has nobody been like her sinds her death representing this family.
She was never evil and yes innocent when she married the man who talks to plants and they talk back to him.>:)
|
I hope the Duke recovers well. I have an immense amount of time for him. I know people who have worked for him, and he is apparently utterly charming; my own association with him being somewhat less. Remember, he gave up his glittering career to support our Queen.
The Princess of Wales (to give her the title that is correctly hers, albeit that it is not used) is similarly widely liked by those who know her. Again, I have not met her, but I know people who do.
I think we are extremely lucky. And one can only feel for the previous Princess of Wales whose lot was very difficult, and who handled it very badly.
|
|
Nissan must like him cos they named a car after him ;o)
|
|
Mapmaker that is cobblers,Diana married a unfaithfull husband and she payed the price her death.That is why Prince Charles never be King in my opinion he carries to much baggage.
|
Sorry Dutchie, it's you who is talking rubbish. Like most break ups here were two sides to it. Charles, since that time, has quietly got on with what he has to do and has, IMHO, grown in dignity and popularity in that time. Diana was on a downhill slope from which she might have recovered but we will never know.
As far as Charles becoming King, if he is still alive when his mother dies, that is what will happen, baggage or no baggage, that's how it works in this country.
|
|
Did anyone else notice that, when the national anthem started on the royal boat, he shot up stiff as a ramrod, while his son and grandsons could only manage a modified slouch?
|
>> Did anyone else notice that, when the national anthem started on the royal boat, he
>> shot up stiff as a ramrod, while his son and grandsons could only manage a
>> modified slouch?
He knows better than to get on wrong side of the missus, by not paying the proper respect towards her theme tune.
After all, he is the one that has to live with her.
|
Dutchie, the only person who can stop Charles acceding the throne is, er, Charles. He would have to refuse it or abdicate immediately.
Would that we could choose our head of state (and second chamber for that matter), like most civilised nations.
I would be delighted to see Charles stand for election as Head of State, and supportive if he won. Heck, I might even vote for him, depending on his competitors.
But why do the Establishment not appear interested in asking the permission of the people to lead their nation? Well, I don't think it takes too much grey matter to work that one out.
They tell us it's best that someone is trained from birth for such a role. Well, I beg to differ. It's unfair both on the person born in to the role and on those unable to apply for the role or choose who fills the role. And it doesn't have to a be a politician either, before anyone asks whether we would want a President Blair. HoS can be an apolitical institution, there are ways of arranging it to be so. Perhaps we could have a President Redgrave, a President Fry, a President Hawking. The possibilities are endless. The current arrangement is, after all, apolitical already, and an elected Head could equally be so. It is merely a ceremonial role and carries no (real) weight politically. The tourists will still flock to see the Palaces and Castles, perhaps even more so if they were fully open as museums. France - the most visited country on Earth, a Republic.
In response to the original topic, I wish the DoE a speedy and full recovery.
Last edited by: Alanović on Thu 16 Aug 12 at 14:03
|
>> Would that we could choose our head of state (and second chamber for that matter),
>> like most civilised nations.
I suppose, like most things, it will happen eventually but I can see no benefit in it whatsover in opening the position up to greasy pole climbers, quite the opposite in fact - the last person I want as head of state is one who has just won a popularity contest.
>> But why do the Establishment not appear interested in asking the permission of the people
>> to lead their nation? Well, I don't think it takes too much grey matter to
>> work that one out.
The people who 'lead' the nation are elected. There may be no better alternative for that, but look what we've got...
>>
>> They tell us it's best that someone is trained from birth for such a role.
>> Well, I beg to differ. It's unfair both on the person born in to the
>> role and on those unable to apply for the role or choose who fills the
>> role. And it doesn't have to a be a politician either, before anyone asks whether
>> we would want a President Blair. HoS can be an apolitical institution, there are ways
>> of arranging it to be so. Perhaps we could have a President Redgrave, a President
>> Fry, a President Hawking. The possibilities are endless. The current arrangement is, after all, apolitical
>> already, and an elected Head could equally be so. It is merely a ceremonial role
>> and carries no (real) weight politically. The tourists will still flock to see the Palaces
>> and Castles, perhaps even more so if they were fully open as museums. France -
>> the most visited country on Earth, a Republic.
I'd have preferred Humphrey Lyttelton but I know he would never have considered it. But none of that is up for debate. We have a constitutional monarchy, and it works. The French got where they are by bloody revolution, I hope you're not recommending that.
Has your apparent antipathy to the institution got anything to do with the Royal Family's predilection for Land Rovers?
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 22 Aug 12 at 01:50
|
>> But why do the Establishment not appear interested in asking the permission of the people
>> to lead their nation? Well, I don't think it takes too much grey matter to
>> work that one out.
>>
It is hard enough trying to get enough support to change the Lords.
No chance in a hundred years to get your wish for abolishing the Monarchy.
Count me in the NoFM2R, Mapmaker, et. al. camp as a supporter of the status quo, and ditto their posts (except the "abusive" one from Mappy - I thought Alanovic had returned to the forum thinking he was safe now that Zero had gone :) ).
|
>> No chance in a hundred years to get your wish for abolishing the Monarchy.
I realise and acknowledge that (well, 50 years perhaps), but I believe strongly the case needs to be argued.
>> I thought Alanovic
>> had returned to the forum thinking he was safe now that Zero had gone :)
Sorry to hear that.
|
>> (except the "abusive" one from Mappy - I thought Alanovic
>> had returned to the forum thinking he was safe now that Zero had gone :)
Assuming by 'Mappy' you are referring to me, I think you'll find that it was Dutchie who swore (albeit fairly mildly) at me, rather than the other way round.
|
>> Assuming by 'Mappy' you are referring to me, I think you'll find that it was
>> Dutchie who swore (albeit fairly mildly) at me, rather than the other way round.
Is Cobblers a swear word?
The local footy fans had better be careful!!!
www.cobblers-shop.co.uk/
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 16 Aug 12 at 15:36
|
>> >> (except the "abusive" one from Mappy - I thought Alanovic
>> >> had returned to the forum thinking he was safe now that Zero had gone
>> :)
>>
>>
>> Assuming by 'Mappy' you are referring to me, I think you'll find that it was
>> Dutchie who swore (albeit fairly mildly) at me, rather than the other way round.
>>
"Mappy" = that is how you are often referred to on this forum, whether you like it or not.
When I replied at 14:36 and used the quotation marks "abusive":
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=11604&m=258410&v=e
I also had in mind Alanovich's post 13 minutes earlier at 14:23:
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=11604&m=258407&v=e
where he said "Hooray, 24 hours back and the abuse begins." and referred specifically to you and Manatee.
That means Alanovich thinks you were being "abusive".
|
Push off back to Holland if you don't like it here, Dutchie.
Except they've got a monarchy too.
Same goes for you, Alanovic, if you want a republic. Try France. Somewhere that you can have a drink at lunchtime and nobody cares, anyway.
Last edited by: Mapmaker on Thu 16 Aug 12 at 14:18
|
Hooray, 24 hours back and the abuse begins. Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered.
I had thought my post was reasonably well argued, balanced, salient and non-confrontational, but some people just can't resist it, can they?
Hey ho. It's just an opinion, no need for you both to get so hissy about it. It's not like I'm in any kind of danger of getting what I want on this score.
I hope you are both well and happy, Manatee and Mapmaker.
|
>>I hope you are both well and happy, Manatee and Mapmaker. Thank you for you good wishes, I hope you too are in good health.
Reciprocated.
Abuse? I just disagreed, that's all.
I admit the Land Rover bit was a mild dig, maybe I should have added a smiley. I was just getting my retaliation in first, so you can have a free go now if you like ;-)
Last edited by: Manatee on Thu 16 Aug 12 at 15:03
|
>>Hooray, 24 hours back and the abuse begins. Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered.<<
I wouldnt take it personally, he has been nibbling at people at every opportunity for a while now. We need people with good taste in motor cars here, I was quite pleased to see you name pop up again, I was aware you were quiet but you dont like to ask.
|
|
I'd quite like to see the UK become a republic too although I bear no personal animosity to the royal family or anyone else either really. Where should I "push off" to?
|
|
Quite so, CGN. Seems that others are somewhat more prone to grudge bearing, sadly.
|
Afternoon Alanovic,
I understand you would like to see a republic.
We are, of course, miles apart on that.
But to move the discussion on a bit, do you think there's any chance your wish will be granted?
Given the popularity of the Queen and the emerging popularity of Wills and Harry, I think a republic is vanishingly unlikely in the foreseeable future.
I would like to see a hard right government, but the chances of that are almost as slim, so I barely bother thinking about it.
|
Hello, Iffy.
I think the chances of a Republic are slim at best, but that doesn't stop me believing it to be the proper course of action for our country and arguing so. Our chance was missed in the years between the Wars, it seems to me.
Short of a Republic, then, would you be willing for there to be a truly independent review of costs and benefits of the Monarchy, and accept that if it were proven that their total cost and unearned privilege far exceeds the total real return to the country, that any grace and favour found to be paid in their direction be properly aligned with the benefit they may bring? Naturally, it's a massive web to untangle, deliberately made so to discourage any proper examination and being too time consuming and costly in and of itself I suppose.
I fear, of course, that such a proper, thorough, unbiased review has as much chance of becoming a reality as a Republic itself. Which is a shame, because I think we've got the right to know where we stand - and at the moment I don't think we do. Which says to me that something is being hidden.
|
...would you be willing for there to be a truly independent review of costs and benefits...
Obvious answer is only if it came out my way.
The benefits are difficult to quantify, which could be seen as a cop out, but I think there's a parallel in newspapers.
Editorial is seen as a cost centre, we don't make them any money directly like an advertising rep, and worse than that we are a cost to the business.
Yet even the meanest bean counter doesn't suggest sacking all the journalists, although they have binned an awful lot in the past 10 years.
...Which says to me that something is being hidden...
I doubt that, although some of the benefits, if not the costs, may as well be hidden because they are difficult to see.
|
>> Obvious answer is only if it came out my way.
Ah, well for you to know that would involve a DeLorean. What I'm asking you is, would you be prepared to take the risk? I expect the answer's no, which leads me to believe you're not confident if it coming out your way.
|
...which leads me to believe you're not confident if it coming out your way...
The status quo suits me, so I would be foolish to choose an option which might alter that.
It's like asking that Assange idiot if he would rather stay as he is - not guilty - or go to trial where he could be found guilty.
|
>>Our chance was missed in the years between the Wars, it seems to me.
"Our best chance" was when we were one! - during the Cromwellian era (1649-1658), our mistake, rather theirs, was reverting back to a Monarchy.
|
|
Sadly, Cromwell's time was more of a theocracy than a democracy. The removal of the Monarchy came a couple of centuries too early.
|
Alanovic, CGN, Dutchie... you have every right to your opinions please keep expressing them but I disagree with them on both the monarchy & the house of lords completely.
Maybe if you don't accuse others of behaving badly, holding grudges etc. they won't accuse you of it, I do not like the level of anger that seems to have become common in this forum in recent weeks/months, and I am sure I am not alone in this.
|
>> Maybe if you don't accuse others of behaving badly, holding grudges etc.
You're quite right, cd. I shouldn't have risen to the bait.
|
"I do not like the level of anger that seems to have become common in this forum in recent weeks/months"
I quite agree and wish that some on here would learn to make a coherent argument rather than resorting to abuse of those who do not hold their opinions.
|
>>do not like the level of anger that seems to have become common in this forum in recent weeks/months <<
Always a problem when you know people too well, makes it harder to be objective.
|
>> Push off back to Holland if you don't like it here, Dutchie.
>>
>> Except they've got a monarchy too.
>>
>> Same goes for you, Alanovic, if you want a republic. Try France. Somewhere that you
>> can have a drink at lunchtime and nobody cares, anyway.
And this is from someone who only earlier reported a post in this thread to us mods by saying
"Wholly out of order"
Pot & kettle spring to mind Mappy.
|
>> And this is from someone who only earlier reported a post in this thread to
>> us mods by saying
>>
>> "Wholly out of order"
>>
>> Pot & kettle spring to mind Mappy.
IMHO. so is this out of order.
I understood the reporting of a message to the mods was a private matter.
Two wrongs don't make a right springs to mind.
Pat
|
>> IMHO. so is this out of order.
>>
>> I understood the reporting of a message to the mods was a private matter.
Did I mention who he reported - no.
>> Two wrongs don't make a right springs to mind.
Well Mappy shouldn't be a hypocrite then.
|
>> Mapmaker that is cobblers,Diana married a unfaithfull husband and she payed the price her death.That
>> is why Prince Charles never be King in my opinion he carries to much baggage.
Dutchie I do like your pithy style in the main, but how on earth did you come to that conclusion? As far as I can recall she didn't suicide and I didn't think anybody except the phony Pharaoh took his allegations of murder seriously
|
>> >> but how on earth did
>> you come to that conclusion? As far as I can recall she didn't suicide and
>> I didn't think anybody except the phony Pharaoh took his allegations of murder seriously
>>
I can see a sort of chain of inevitability but not of direct causes and consequences:
1) she was young, overshadowed by famously forthright relations, perhaps lacking in confidence, and let's face it, not in the highest inteligence bracket
2) she met the PoW, nice sort of chap, his family liked her, everyone seemed charmed by her youth and niaivety, she got carried away by the dream come true
3) reality intervened. He turned out to be a bit odd, old at heart although prone to juvenile tastes like the Goons and bog seats etc. Also he needed an older woman in his life, ie the sofa woman.
4) She liked younger friends, or so-called friends and hangers on, felt trapped and stifled
5) tried to find an outlet in good causes, mines, etc
6) marriage slowly fell apart, despite efforts and pretence
7) she now had a popular image she couldn't live up to, got in with somewhat shady people who didn't add lustre to the shiny princess image
8) hounded by journalists, life became an impossible conflict of courting publicity but also trying to flee from it
9) fled in in car driven rather over-enthusiastically, possibly egged on by associates who may not have strictly followed the muslim non-alcohol code
10) crashed and killed
Sad story, but not murder or suicide.
|
I think the DOE is more ill than they are letting on.
Cast back to the Olympic closing ceremony. The Queen, DOE, Charles and William. None of them there when at least one of them should have been. I commented on the night, especially when Coe started his speech with "Your Majesty", that something was up. I think there will be bad news from the palace soon.
|
>>when Coe started his speech with "Your Majesty>>
Several possibilities here.
There are other Majesties in the world, and I think that the Queen of Spain was there.
Rogge said "Your Majesties" - there may have been multiple Majesties.
On the other hand, it's easy to confuse foreigners with the protocol, and he may have meant hignesses or royal highnesses.
Anyway, I'm a royalist, but only because it's the least worst option.
I'm not really a democrat - I mean you lot have just as many votes as I do!!!!
|
|
Nah! - done-in (allegedly). The "Royal Echelons" would not tolerate future "Heirs" to the English throne having a Muslim Step-father.
|
|
Good grief, even I wouldn't go that far, devonite. The theory that senior Royals or their acolytes would conspire to murder the mother of two young boys in their own family is, frankly, extremely unlikely.
|
...The theory that senior Royals or their acolytes would conspire to murder the mother of two young boys in their own family is, frankly, extremely unlikely...
It certainly is, and if they were conspiring the accident did the job for them.
I imagine some in the Royal Household would have seen the fatal outcome as not an entirely bad thing.
|
|
Princes in the Tower? - Tis in the blood!
|
>>she didn't suicide
"Suicide" is no more a verb than "medal" or "podium".
>>hounded by journalists
Glossing over the question of whether such photographers should be described as journalists, there is something here which bothers me but doesn't seem to dawn on anybody else;
They were taking ridiculous risks to take ridiculous photgraphs because many people will buy newspapers with those photos in. If you don't like their behaviour, and I guess most of us don't, then do not buy any newspaper which publishes such material.
The media don't care what they print beyond being desperate to print something that you'll pay for. Watch them stop if it harms their business.
|
>>"Suicide" is no more a verb than "medal" or "podium".
I couldn't agree more. I missed a word out. Sorry.
|
>>I missed a word out. Sorry.
Beg your pardon, I thought you'd succumbed to the current fashionable trend of confusing the two.
|
>> 9) fled in in car driven rather over-enthusiastically, possibly egged on by associates who may
>> not have strictly followed the muslim non-alcohol code
>> 10) crashed and killed
>>
>>
>> Sad story, but not murder or suicide.
>>
No, not murder or suicide, but certainly foolish, reckless and irresponsible behaviour.
Can we agree on a large measure of contributory negligence?
She was a passenger in a car driven recklessly by a drug and alcohol user. There were four people in the car. Three were not wearing seat belts, one person was wearing a seat belt. The three people not wearing seat belts were killed, the one person wearing a seat belt was injured, but survived.
|
I agree with Cliff but he's forgetting
11) PoW was seeing Camilla on the days leading up to the wedding.
That's enough to make anyone feel unloved and worthless.
Pat
|
On the days leading up to the wedding.
That's enough to make anyone feel unloved and worthless.
Thats why he was seeing Camilla!
|
In his eyes it was a marriage of convenience...in hers a marriage based on love.
For anyone who has been used, it's a rude awakening.
Pat
|
|
Charles was pushed in to marrying Diana as he was 33 and it was vital that he produced an heir. As far as he was concerned he was simply marrying a womb ! Unfortunately for Diana she came from a disfunctional family and married into an even more disfunctional family.
|
skip....your spot on mate
|
Although we find it hard to comprehend these days, some parts of the aristocracy still marry people they 'like' or learn to love rather than have already fallen for. It is often a sense of duty on the part of both parties in order to unite fortunes and families.
It doesnt make much sense to people living in a council house because they dont inhabit that world, but it does still exist out there. While most of the aristocracy I know are thoroughly lovely and generous people, there are a few who still fear the common folk and marrying 'well' stops ones family from loosing social positioning. It sounds absurd but the truth sometimes is.
I know of one lady who changed her entire name before marriage for this very reason. She is you wont be suprised to know, intolerable and much disliked. Her children strangely are quite charming though, in that privileged, no idea of the real world kind of way.
The Spencer family has for some time been concerned with their declining fortunes and id not be suprised if there had been outside pressure on Diana.
|
>> Although we find it hard to comprehend these days, some parts of the aristocracy still
>> marry people they 'like' or learn to love rather than have already fallen for.
>>
It's pretty common anywhere, I'd say. Love is a concept that appeals to most people, and they are conditioned to contrive the circumstances that bring it about. That's why most people are prepared to settle for 2nd or 3rd choice rather than spend their entire life pining for the unattainable first.
But then it depends (putting on my best PoW voice) "whatever love means".
|
|
I`m settled with my 2nd -who should have been my 1st - that I`ve never pined for, and you say there may be a 3rd! ;-) life gets better!
|
I think our expectations get less as we get older.
Pat
|
>>I think our expectations get less as we get older.
I hope my wife's do.
|
I didn't mean 2nd wife, I meant no.2 on the list of people you wanted to marry.
There are 7 billion people in the world. It would be an amazing coincidence if the one you were meant to marry just happened to be the one you met last night at the club.
So a certain amount of wish-fulfillment must come into it.
|
Prince Philip. - Lygonos
