MELTONSTILTON 452 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 Why all this bickering, at the moment the child is only one day old. Be he is to be King or commoner, we should be happy for him and his parents, the argument about if Britain being a Republic or Kingdom is not for now, children are our greatest asset, we should cherish them not turn them into a tool of argument............................................... 2 Link to post Share on other sites
NewBasfordlad 3,599 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 The experts reckon that if we gathered in all the wealth and then distributed it evenly amongst everyone that in just a few short years things would be back to how them are now. Why? Because most of the moaning buggers are just plain bloody idle. Link to post Share on other sites
Limey 242 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 I didn't quote any statistics, I quoted FACTS. There is a huge difference and I will bet the cost of all the beer you can drink that you cannot disprove them! So quit whinging, and do some reasearch before you offer an opinion that is an impossibility! As to banning stuff invented by the rich - how about houses, cars, electricity, the telephone, etc. All designed to keep the poor compliant? Link to post Share on other sites
Michael Booth 7,364 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 David and Cheryl, from Nottingham, have had a baby boy. There were a few photographers there but they were family and friends. They didn't get on the telly but they did make it to the Nottingham Post. From what I understand, everyone is very happy about the birth and there's been no bickering or insults thrown. Nice, isn't it. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Beefsteak 305 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 I bet they used an NHS hospital too! Link to post Share on other sites
Beefsteak 305 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 It is obvious you have never read an in depth history of England and the usurpers who claimed the English throne in 1066.But then again the 'Normans' didn't have any military aircraft:) I have absolutely no idea what that stupid statement was trying to say. Are you accusing me of being ignorant? Or do you think that because you've left these shores of ours you have some sort of superior knowledge and hold on the rest of us 'mere mortals'. I only ask as I have an 'O' level in History, (Albeit only a B grade) and the Norman conquests were a part of the curriculum during that particular period. So ask away if you need any help I'm sure I can oblige you with an answer or two. Link to post Share on other sites
mick2me 3,033 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 A royal baby was born, End of... The run up to it on all channels, and the continued coverage is just over the top. I am sick and tired of it and in fact was even before the baby was born. I am neither a royalist nor an anti royalist, though I had the honour of being chosen to take photograph of Princess Di at several places she visited in Nottingham in the 1990s. I have one or two pictures left which I will try to post when I find them. There was some reasonable shots but the negatives just got filed away and no doubt later disposed of by my employer. Can anyone tell what the succession to the throne is, Charles will be king Perhaps, after him who and who after that assuming that whoever the next in line after charles has a child? Link to post Share on other sites
catfan 14,793 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 I thought this forum advocated free speech ? Beefsteak, I do get off my Arse everyday & work damned hard for my money No handouts here.Also I am not envious of anyone at all. I am quite happy with my lot. Again, free speech is just that, you have your opinion & I'll have mine. Link to post Share on other sites
NewBasfordlad 3,599 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 RELIGIOUS EXTREMIST LEADER. Absolute faith in god and god guides his actions. Many pubs shut. All theatres closed. Most sports banned, you will be whipped if caught playing football on the holy day. Work banned on the holy day, women doing unnecessary work to be publically humiliated. One day a month compulsory fast, no food what so ever. Women to dress soberly, colourful dresses banned, makeup banned. Christmas banned. Children of other religions enslaved and sent abroad to die working. Genocide of other religions. Law enforced by the leaders private army. Does this sound familiar it should....................... Britain under the Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell (a title he passed on to his son Richard) the complete fruitcake. Link to post Share on other sites
mick2me 3,033 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 There are conditions of use attached to use of these forums. There is a fine line between what is acceptable, and what is not. In the end the moderators and admins make the decision. What is not acceptable are attacks on members due to a disagreement over their opinions. The route for reporting such posts are clear, and decision will be made by staff here. Link to post Share on other sites
Beefsteak 305 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 The new baby is third in line , pushing everybody from Harry one step down the ladder. And Catfan, nobody is trying to stop you having an opinion , I initially asked that anyone wanting to moan about the new heir to the throne should open their own thread and bitch to each other about it. Link to post Share on other sites
NewBasfordlad 3,599 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 Mick its Charles, William and then the new born baby. Link to post Share on other sites
mick2me 3,033 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 But surely if William as King has a child the new boy wont get a look in? Link to post Share on other sites
StephenFord 866 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 Like I said on another thread, "Don't come out yer collar!" Link to post Share on other sites
Beefsteak 305 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 Eh? William, as heir to the throne, has had a child who is third in line no matter what happens. It doesn't make any difference whether he's on the throne or not. Link to post Share on other sites
mick2me 3,033 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 But he might have a girl and they will probably change the PC rules to positively discriminate in favor of a queen? Link to post Share on other sites
Beefsteak 305 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 The rule has been (partially) changed to become 'first born' whether it be a boy or a girl, it just happened that they had a boy. (IE if they'd had a girl she would have been third in line whether they went on to have a boy later or not) Link to post Share on other sites
StephenFord 866 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 ...otherwise Charles, born 1948 - 4 years before his mother became Queen, would have been pushed out by Andrew - the first son born after her accession, and I'm not going to risk commenting on that.... Link to post Share on other sites
DAVIDW 1,681 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 Daily Mail published a line of succession today , going up to the 41st in line ! Number 34 , Cassius Taylor ? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2361666/Royal-baby--whos-line-Guide-new-line-succession-British-throne.html Link to post Share on other sites
Beefsteak 305 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 2nd son of Lady Helen (The melon) Windsor and Timothy Taylor ( makes a nice pint does that landlord!) Grandson of the Duke of Kent. They get to that position as both Lady Helens brothers married catholics and thus lost the right to the throne (I'm not going down that line !!) Link to post Share on other sites
DAVIDW 1,681 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 Thanks Beefsteak .....well if (godforbid) something dreadful happened to the first 33 in-line we could have a King Cassius. Thats got a certain ring to it Link to post Share on other sites
Trevor S 2,003 Posted July 23, 2013 Report Share Posted July 23, 2013 darkazana, it was a very nice gesture to start a Topic, for those interested, to wish a couple congratulations on the birth of their first child. It is, however, saddening to wake up this morning down here in Australia to find this Topic has expanded from one to four pages; consisting in the main of dissension among members on the merits of the Royals, name calling and muck raking. Whatever your views on royalty, you cannot change history nor your heritage! Now let's get back on topic and wish the parents and their new born all the best Link to post Share on other sites
Michael Booth 7,364 Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 Nicely defused by mick2me. Link to post Share on other sites
Bubblewrap 3,815 Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 And it sh*ts too News today that William had changed it's nappy. Link to post Share on other sites
mick2me 3,033 Posted July 24, 2013 Report Share Posted July 24, 2013 Royalty? Nah Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts