Wedding?
- Thread starter Pete
- Start date
Kate's sister may have done the unthinkable and outshone the bride - at least online. "Impeccably toned and dressed controversially in a figure-hugging white gown, Pippa Middleton nearly crashed Twitter as she held her sister's sizable train this morning."
Contender for "Rear of the Year" me thinks? :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
Contender for "Rear of the Year" me thinks? :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
Keith, your attire had quite an effect on me. Should keep pirates at bay if you wear that rig on your wine-filled trawler.
Every time I've been married, I've had to pay for the whole gig...the church, the entertainment, the transportation, food and wine, etc. It seemed fair to me, after all, it's my wedding right?
Is the royal family paying for the church and all the police men and the choir/music, etc? Or, is the English tax payer paying for all of that stuff? If it's the latter then that seems to be just more of the same stuff that's been going on for 800 years...the royals living off the sweat on the brow of the Englishman.
Is the royal family paying for the church and all the police men and the choir/music, etc? Or, is the English tax payer paying for all of that stuff? If it's the latter then that seems to be just more of the same stuff that's been going on for 800 years...the royals living off the sweat on the brow of the Englishman.
I suppose there had to be one drudge on the forum - just surprised it was you - your sentiments are so old hat and "Red Robbo" it's not even true...
Royal family & events such as this generates billions for the UK in "invisible" earnings... ask any London hotel, restaurant owner how they felt about it..
It's paid for by the Civil List - i.e. budgeted.
Being subjective Keith? ;p
I really don't get the English who actually want a monarchy but it doesn't bother me, what bothers me is that we in Australia are it's "subjects" as well and as far as I'm concerned they can stick that up their "royal" etceteras.
One of our Prime Ministers got lambasted by English media for have the temerity to touch the Queen, would have been polite had it been anybody else but no, apparently she's better then the rest... FFS!
Bollocks!
Before you have a fit Keith I repeat, I don't care if the English want to keep their monarchy.
Tim.
I really don't get the English who actually want a monarchy but it doesn't bother me, what bothers me is that we in Australia are it's "subjects" as well and as far as I'm concerned they can stick that up their "royal" etceteras.
One of our Prime Ministers got lambasted by English media for have the temerity to touch the Queen, would have been polite had it been anybody else but no, apparently she's better then the rest... FFS!
Bollocks!
Before you have a fit Keith I repeat, I don't care if the English want to keep their monarchy.
Tim.
Last edited:
Geeez, you sound like your hero. Why don't you take time to know how our National Anthem came about? Pretty soon we'll hear you talking of the virtues of I'd like to teach the world to sing"
This? :-
"On Sept. 13, 1814, Francis Scott Key visited the British fleet in Chesapeake Bay to secure the release of Dr. William Beanes, who had been captured after the burning of Washington, DC. The release was secured, but Key was detained on ship overnight during the shelling of Fort McHenry, one of the forts defending Baltimore. In the morning, he was so delighted to see the American flag still flying over the fort that he began a poem to commemorate the occasion. First published under the title “Defense of Fort M'Henry,” the poem soon attained wide popularity as sung to the tune “To Anacreon in Heaven.” The origin of this tune is obscure, but it may have been written by John Stafford Smith, a British composer born in 1750. “The Star-Spangled Banner” was officially made the national anthem by Congress in 1931, although it already had been adopted as such by the army and the navy."
As for national anthems - personally I've always thought the 1812 overture sums up nationalistic sentiment nicely, when it comes down to it it's all about the cannons...
Trying to get the world singing instead of inventing more ways to keep it exploding... what a dumb idea...
Tim.
"On Sept. 13, 1814, Francis Scott Key visited the British fleet in Chesapeake Bay to secure the release of Dr. William Beanes, who had been captured after the burning of Washington, DC. The release was secured, but Key was detained on ship overnight during the shelling of Fort McHenry, one of the forts defending Baltimore. In the morning, he was so delighted to see the American flag still flying over the fort that he began a poem to commemorate the occasion. First published under the title “Defense of Fort M'Henry,” the poem soon attained wide popularity as sung to the tune “To Anacreon in Heaven.” The origin of this tune is obscure, but it may have been written by John Stafford Smith, a British composer born in 1750. “The Star-Spangled Banner” was officially made the national anthem by Congress in 1931, although it already had been adopted as such by the army and the navy."
As for national anthems - personally I've always thought the 1812 overture sums up nationalistic sentiment nicely, when it comes down to it it's all about the cannons...
Trying to get the world singing instead of inventing more ways to keep it exploding... what a dumb idea...
Tim.
Last edited:
Try this, start two threads with the same photo of a blue and a red gt40, call one blue vs red gt40 and the other republicans vs democrats, see which one still exists in three days.
Excuse my cynicism - monarchies, and especially the fawning that goes with them, do that to me.
Tim.
Excuse my cynicism - monarchies, and especially the fawning that goes with them, do that to me.
Tim.
Last edited:
I can't afford fits Tim, and I can't get upset if someone expresses a contrary view. Not dogmatic here..Well yes of course, and we don't particlarly care about the issue concerning Australia's place in the Commonwealth either so all things considered we'll call it a draw. It seems that a majority in Oz want to retain the status quo but I guess that not only is it pretty close but eventually and inevitably it will tip into a Republic..
And why not?
Ooops! Late edit there Tim... fawning? Not here mate.... People have to believe in something.. Who is anyone to denigrate that faith?
Anyway as Tom P says, the thread was about a happy event... and it made us all happy here in sunny Lymington!
I am a born chuckle bunny mate..
I love Australians when they visit us here - and we get a lot via the sailing community. They hugely enjoy telling us that we are rubbish at this rubbish at that etc etc, and then get really annoyed when we agree with them!
Of course, when I enquire whether we could enjoy a similar immunity in Australia, I often get replies such as something to do with looking for my teeth on the pavement.... :laugh:
I love Australians when they visit us here - and we get a lot via the sailing community. They hugely enjoy telling us that we are rubbish at this rubbish at that etc etc, and then get really annoyed when we agree with them!
Of course, when I enquire whether we could enjoy a similar immunity in Australia, I often get replies such as something to do with looking for my teeth on the pavement.... :laugh:
Tim,
In excess of 2 billion people watched the event. That's a huge chunk of the worlds population. I dare say that a large portion of Ozzies and Kiwi's watched it too. You can be cynical, it's your right after all. But don't for one minute think that as a nation we are stuck with tugging our forlocks and grovelling - that stopped a long time ago.
We now see these events for what they are. A great sideshow to take the mind off the drudgery of normal life for a lot of people.
There's nowt wrong with expressing pride in a nation - christ knows you guys do it an awful lot more that we do. This is one of our ways of expressing that national pride without being jingoistic.
These are traditions that hark back a long long time. Ours is a very old nation built on bloodshed and sacrifice, like many others. Should we now stop Black Rod from opening the doors to Parliament. Should we do away with history that still lives today, because at some time it was built on the backs of poor people? Or should we keep them, safe in the knowledge that we don't do those things anymore, and are better for it?
In excess of 2 billion people watched the event. That's a huge chunk of the worlds population. I dare say that a large portion of Ozzies and Kiwi's watched it too. You can be cynical, it's your right after all. But don't for one minute think that as a nation we are stuck with tugging our forlocks and grovelling - that stopped a long time ago.
We now see these events for what they are. A great sideshow to take the mind off the drudgery of normal life for a lot of people.
There's nowt wrong with expressing pride in a nation - christ knows you guys do it an awful lot more that we do. This is one of our ways of expressing that national pride without being jingoistic.
These are traditions that hark back a long long time. Ours is a very old nation built on bloodshed and sacrifice, like many others. Should we now stop Black Rod from opening the doors to Parliament. Should we do away with history that still lives today, because at some time it was built on the backs of poor people? Or should we keep them, safe in the knowledge that we don't do those things anymore, and are better for it?
Quote: "...what bothers me is that we in Australia are it's "subjects" as well and as far as I'm concerned they can stick that up their "royal" etceteras."
Not sure I understand this. Is Australia being 'subjugated' by the Monarchy? As part of the Commonwealth? Is it not independant, and 'subjects' by choice?
If so, wouldn't the complaint be against those in Oz who vote to keep it that way vs. Brits in general? HAS there been a vote to keep or dump the UK ties? Why the underlying hint of frustration or irritation? I'm missing something here.
Besides, Kate looked gorgeous, a welcome change from the recent Royal addition)
Not sure I understand this. Is Australia being 'subjugated' by the Monarchy? As part of the Commonwealth? Is it not independant, and 'subjects' by choice?
If so, wouldn't the complaint be against those in Oz who vote to keep it that way vs. Brits in general? HAS there been a vote to keep or dump the UK ties? Why the underlying hint of frustration or irritation? I'm missing something here.
Besides, Kate looked gorgeous, a welcome change from the recent Royal addition
)David Morton
Lifetime Supporter
Tim,
Who is bothered anyway? You have your opinion and I have mine.
We are all different. Just that some are more different than others.
She's OK and a good looker. He's OK and holding down an OK job.
Their wedding probably cost me, I am informed, about 55 pence and I don't care. I would have paid a lot more than that because of the feel good factor it brought to the UK yesterday. Here at home we quaffed loads of everything at it was great.
You can think of us what you like and to be honest, I don't really think any of us really care.
Who is bothered anyway? You have your opinion and I have mine.
We are all different. Just that some are more different than others.
She's OK and a good looker. He's OK and holding down an OK job.
Their wedding probably cost me, I am informed, about 55 pence and I don't care. I would have paid a lot more than that because of the feel good factor it brought to the UK yesterday. Here at home we quaffed loads of everything at it was great.
You can think of us what you like and to be honest, I don't really think any of us really care.
Similar threads
