Prince Charles killed in car wreck in Paris
- Thread starter edvader
- Start date
William is next in line after his Granny.
Diana would now be married to someone else. Think of the poor guy, having to tell the next king of Britain he couldn't go out until he made his bed. Wasn't there some guy called Simon de Montfort that was in the same situation, except that he was the guy that snuffed the old King? The prince grew up and had him killed.
Diana would now be married to someone else. Think of the poor guy, having to tell the next king of Britain he couldn't go out until he made his bed. Wasn't there some guy called Simon de Montfort that was in the same situation, except that he was the guy that snuffed the old King? The prince grew up and had him killed.
Flocculencio
Donor
Elton John wouldn't have seen the need to revise "Candle in the Wind", turning it from a classic tribute to Mariyln Monroe to a mawkish lament about Diana Spencer.
On the bright side, the removal of Charles might enhance the prestige of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Go...Windsor in the long run. After all, though Charles is wishy-washy and unphotogenic, Wills promises to be the playboy prince that the tabloid readership will love.
On the bright side, the removal of Charles might enhance the prestige of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Go...Windsor in the long run. After all, though Charles is wishy-washy and unphotogenic, Wills promises to be the playboy prince that the tabloid readership will love.
Flocculencio
Donor
DMA said:Pity the entire Royal Family wasn't in the car is about all I can say...
They're not that bad.
Well it might be true that William might be their saving grace, but he still has Saxe-Coburg-et al blood in him.
I guess, though, it depends upon your definition of bad. If you mean bad as in evil, well no they aren't bad. But if you mean a pathetic bunch of retards, well I'd have to say yes.
Then again I am a member of the Cromwell Association so I'm guess I'm biased, but if you compare the House of Windsor to the other Royal Families of Europe, oh yeah they're bad.
Anyway, here's a riddle for you - How many Royals can you fit inside a speeding car?
I guess, though, it depends upon your definition of bad. If you mean bad as in evil, well no they aren't bad. But if you mean a pathetic bunch of retards, well I'd have to say yes.
Then again I am a member of the Cromwell Association so I'm guess I'm biased, but if you compare the House of Windsor to the other Royal Families of Europe, oh yeah they're bad.
Anyway, here's a riddle for you - How many Royals can you fit inside a speeding car?
Flocculencio said:
they're worse than nothing, but not terribly malign in any positive sense.
Flocculencio
Donor
DMA said:Then again I am a member of the Cromwell Association so I'm guess I'm biased, but if you compare the House of Windsor to the other Royal Families of Europe, oh yeah they're bad.
Anyway, here's a riddle for you - How many Royals can you fit inside a speeding car?
So what's the goal of the cromwell association? To restore a Puritan Theocratic Dictatorship in the UK and re-invade Ireland, massacring Catholics witht the New New Model Army?
And as for the answer to your riddle- probably around eight if you stack them properly.
Flocculencio said:So what's the goal of the cromwell association? To restore a Puritan Theocratic Dictatorship in the UK and re-invade Ireland, massacring Catholics witht the New New Model Army?
Considering you're a "Unrepentant Anglophile" I'd say you'd fit right in
Flocculencio said:
Only eight? That's not much. Isn't the record for fitting people in a VW Beetle something like 20? If so, surely you can fit at least 40 into a speeding Parisian limo
Flocculencio
Donor
DMA said:Considering you're a "Unrepentant Anglophile" I'd say you'd fit right in
Save for the fact that I'm Indian and agnostic, yes
Here we bloody go again. I had to write an essay about the Royal Family a while ago, I came down on the side of the Monarchy as an institution, I avoided commenting too much on the individuals involved. Suffice to say, I'd rather have the Queen as a head of state than Toby Blair or George "don't give me pretzels" W Bush.DMA said:Well it might be true that William might be their saving grace, but he still has Saxe-Coburg-et al blood in him.
I guess, though, it depends upon your definition of bad. If you mean bad as in evil, well no they aren't bad. But if you mean a pathetic bunch of retards, well I'd have to say yes.
Then again I am a member of the Cromwell Association so I'm guess I'm biased, but if you compare the House of Windsor to the other Royal Families of Europe, oh yeah they're bad.
Anyway, here's a riddle for you - How many Royals can you fit inside a speeding car?
Flocculencio said:Save for the fact that I'm Indian and agnostic, yes
On a serious note, the Cromwell Association is first an historical society about the Civil War/Commonwealth/Protectorate period. There is a political element, wanting a democratic republic for Britiain, but it's not the main issue. So don't expect any revolution led by the Association. It's web page link is here @ http://www.olivercromwell.org/
Paulo the Limey said:
Hey Paulo! I was wondering when you'd say something.
For Britain, yes the institution of the Monarchy I can go along with. But just not with the current lot. Likewise, I agree about your comments about Dubya & company. (BTW I can't wait to see the new Mike Moore film on Dubya)
Maybe you guys need some fresh blood instead of the inbred Germans you've got. Any candidates for a fresh start? Sean Connery maybe?
Flocculencio
Donor
DMA said:Hey Paulo! I was wondering when you'd say something.
For Britain, yes the institution of the Monarchy I can go along with. But just not with the current lot. Likewise, I agree about your comments about Dubya & company. (BTW I can't wait to see the new Mike Moore film on Dubya)
Maybe you guys need some fresh blood instead of the inbred Germans you've got. Any candidates for a fresh start? Sean Connery maybe?
He'd spit on the throne methinks. He'd be willing to be King of Scotland but would probably tell the other parts of the country to go to hell.
Possibly the UK could ask the Dutch royal family for an infusion of royal blood? The House of Oranje still seems to be going strong and I've always thought it was a pity that Wilhelm van Oranje and Queen Mary didn't have any kids.
Right…
DMA: 2+2=?
The Monarchy are struggling to adjust to today's social values. In some ways, they're damned any way they go-
1) Same morals as the rest of us- no longer provide a moral guideline for the nation, get pilloried by the media for their immoral shenanigans.
2) Sets moral standard for the nation- not in touch with the nation and their immoral shenanigans, gets pilloried by the media for their aloof attitude and Victorian ways.
3) Fails to accomplish either of the above- gets pilloried by the media for their shenanigans, lack of shenanigans, and their indecisiveness over whether they should be having shenanigans at all. The media are a bitch like that.
DMA said:Hey Paulo! I was wondering when you'd say something.
DMA: 2+2=?
The Monarchy are struggling to adjust to today's social values. In some ways, they're damned any way they go-
1) Same morals as the rest of us- no longer provide a moral guideline for the nation, get pilloried by the media for their immoral shenanigans.
2) Sets moral standard for the nation- not in touch with the nation and their immoral shenanigans, gets pilloried by the media for their aloof attitude and Victorian ways.
3) Fails to accomplish either of the above- gets pilloried by the media for their shenanigans, lack of shenanigans, and their indecisiveness over whether they should be having shenanigans at all. The media are a bitch like that.
Paulo the Limey said:
2+2=2+2
Paulo the Limey said:The Monarchy are struggling to adjust to today's social values. In some ways, they're damned any way they go-
1) Same morals as the rest of us- no longer provide a moral guideline for the nation, get pilloried by the media for their immoral shenanigans.
2) Sets moral standard for the nation- not in touch with the nation and their immoral shenanigans, gets pilloried by the media for their aloof attitude and Victorian ways.
3) Fails to accomplish either of the above- gets pilloried by the media for their shenanigans, lack of shenanigans, and their indecisiveness over whether they should be having shenanigans at all. The media are a bitch like that.
Mind you, they do little to help themselves with their behaviour. And it's not as if it's merely one or two of them, but it's almost all of them. Furthermore, when you compare their behaviour with other Royal Families, they are a sorry looking lot. Now fair enough, the media may indeed concentrate on the activities of the Windsors much more than their European cousins, but their cousins just don't behave the same way, & when they are caught out, show much more dignity than the Windsors. As I say, maybe it's time for the Windsors to go & completely new blood is introduced. Any candidates?
BTW, Paulo, how many British Royals do you reckon can fit in a speeding Parisian limo?
Glad we can agree on something then!DMA said:
All of them. Simply accelerate the limo to c, it'll occupy all points in the universe simultaneously, which means the entire British Royal Family will be inside, or part of the limo.dma said:BTW, Paulo, how many British Royals do you reckon can fit in a speeding Parisian limo?
And with this thoroughly off-topic post, I'm returning to revising for my last ever exam.
No really I am
any second now…