ForumGarden

It seems Camilla's unpopular because she's ugly, so what, do we have to have a pretty princess :-3

buttercup;631467 wrote: Bill :-4

Public will believe what they read, unfortunately 'comics' like News of the world & the Sun ect seem to reach more of the population than reputable one's.

Suzy :-4

Why would the queen hand over the crown? There is no need for her to do that.

Also you cant say ' i loved Diana along with everyone else' You can say 'you loved her & a lot of people loved her' Not everyone did, myself included.


I stand correct Buttercup, a lot of people loved Diana

buttercup;631472 wrote: It seems Camilla's unpopular because she's ugly, so what, do we have to have a pretty princess :-3


If that's a question then yes, the fairytale stories say so.

Bill Sikes;631463 wrote: She cannot retire, she's the Queen!


And? She is an old lady and should be watching Jeremy Kyle with her cuppa tea.

SuzyB;631471 wrote: http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.c ... emID/15118



This is a poll conducted where Prince William is in the lead to be our next King.


You said "The general opinion of the people of Britain is that he shouldn't be King". Your reference above does not answer that question. Try again.

crazygal;631478 wrote: And? She is an old lady and should be watching Jeremy Kyle with her cuppa tea.


Who the hell's Jeremy Kyle? Let me guess - a chat-show-for-air-heads host?

Bill Sikes;631491 wrote: You said "The general opinion of the people of Britain is that he shouldn't be King". Your reference above does not answer that question. Try again.


Bill, your just being pedantic, I will change my earlier statement just for you, most people I know and some polls asking who would they like to be our future King, the answer is William, unless you are looking at Bill Sikes facts, of should Charles be King where he has remarried then the answer is, Charles should be King :wah: :wah:

Bill Sikes;631499 wrote: Who the hell's Jeremy Kyle? Let me guess - a chat-show-for-air-heads host?


And you pretended not to know who he was :rolleyes: :wah:

Air heads, oooooooooooooooh. Hardly an air head. :wah:

The queen will live to at least 100, this is not a question that should concern anyone for another 20 years. She will die the queen period.

buttercup;631472 wrote: It seems Camilla's unpopular because she's ugly, so what, do we have to have a pretty princess :-3


Not too bad for 60 years old, is she? Have you seen any pictures of her when she was in her 20s?

buttercup;631520 wrote: The queen will live to at least 100, this is not a question that should concern anyone for another 20 years. She will die the queen period.


How long will I live for?

buttercup;631520 wrote: The queen will live to at least 100, this is not a question that should concern anyone for another 20 years. She will die the queen period.


I hope so, what a woman, she works so hard, I have a lot of admiration for that woman :-4

crazygal;631525 wrote: How long will I live for?


The rate your going with Bill, i'd say about another 15 mins :wah:

buttercup;631535 wrote: The rate your going with Bill, i'd say about another 15 mins :wah:


That means I've got 5 mins :wah:

Bill Sikes;631524 wrote: Not too bad for 60 years old, is she? Have you seen any pictures of her when she was in her 20s?


Yes i have, she was ok, no stunner but i dont care if we have pretty royalty, what's important to me is what goes on in her head. Pity Charles just dident marry her back then, bringing Diana & Fergie in was BIG mistakes. We live & learn :-6

buttercup;631535 wrote: The rate your going with Bill, i'd say about another 15 mins :wah:


:wah: Well you know the queen will live to 100 so I assume you know something nobody else does. :p

SuzyB;631540 wrote: That means I've got 5 mins :wah:


Your already dead to Bill :wah:

crazygal;631545 wrote: :wah: Well you know the queen will live to 100 so I assume you know something nobody else does. :p


I'd certainly be willing to place a bet with you :sneaky:

buttercup;631547 wrote: Your already dead to Bill :wah:


Gutted :rolleyes: :wah:

SuzyB;631550 wrote: Gutted :rolleyes: :wah:


:wah:

Well that was a good debate:wah: :wah:

SuzyB;631511 wrote: And you pretended not to know who he was rolleyes: wah:


Cor, was I right? I haven't looked him up on the net, yet!

I have just looked him up, unfortunately. He seems to be a clone of that fat old bag whatshername, sans the tits.

The stuff I saw before I fell asleep didn't seem too controversial.

This is how it goes , no ifs ,buts or maybes , the Queen dies , Charles becomes king Camilla becomes Queen , Charles dies , William becomes King , simple as that , Charles can abdicate if he wants to but I don't think he will

Uncle Kram;631692 wrote: The stuff I saw before I fell asleep didn't seem too controversial.


i thought the same

neffy;632061 wrote: i thought the same


I read in the paper today that they showed the crash scene and oxygen being given to Diana, although you didn't see her face

Suzy you couldent see hardly anything in that pic, you certainly could not make out what kind of car it was or who the person was.

Uncle Fester;632048 wrote: This is how it goes , no ifs ,buts or maybes , the Queen dies , Charles becomes king Camilla becomes Queen , Charles dies , William becomes King , simple as that , Charles can abdicate if he wants to but I don't think he will


That's just how it should be - "because it is".

Every time I see this thread I think someone is calling me and I think "uh, oh, they're using my real name... I must have done something baaaaaaad"

About the program....does British TV have a "sweeps week" as they do here in the States. They'll just about show anything on TV for ratings. If enough people did not watch, won't they be surprised.

I have recently finished reading a book about the Royal Family. There was a time when the Queen would not let "divorced persons" in her presence. The few photos I have seen of a younger Queen smiling, she was radiant. She and her son Charles are raised to be royalty. They have been unfamiliar with the lives of "commoners". Enter Diana, who is lovely and not raised as royalty. And she falls in love with her betrothed. She did produce heirs, but she expected more. Love and respect in return from her husband..which she did not receive. Where was she supposed to fit in after she served her purpose? That was the tragedy. So she lived a troubled life in private, but in public, she did claim the hearts of us "commoners".

Everytime I see pictures of her sons, it is Diana I see, not Charles.

along-for-the-ride;632271 wrote: Love and respect in return from her husband..which she did not receive.


That, it seems, was entirely a reciprocal arrangement.



along-for-the-ride;632271 wrote: Everytime I see pictures of her sons, it is Diana I see, not Charles.


:) Just look at those things sticking out from the sides of their heads!



One overlooked thing in this is that both princes do seem to be OK with the PoW and his wife.

along-for-the-ride;632271 wrote: does British TV have a "sweeps week" as they do here in the States.


Not AFAIK. I've never heard of it - however, the "silly season" will be upon us directly .

buttercup;631520 wrote: She will die the queen period.


And the monarchy will die with her.

Sorry Chooks i dont agree with you there.

Chookie;632320 wrote: And the monarchy will die with her.


The idea of a "President Blair" as head of state is almost enough to make me a monarchist.

gmc;633013 wrote: The idea of a "President Blair" as head of state is almost enough to make me a monarchist.


wrong gordon brown ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

along-for-the-ride;632271 wrote: About the program....does British TV have a "sweeps week" as they do here in the States. They'll just about show anything on TV for ratings. If enough people did not watch, won't they be surprised.

I have recently finished reading a book about the Royal Family. There was a time when the Queen would not let "divorced persons" in her presence. The few photos I have seen of a younger Queen smiling, she was radiant. She and her son Charles are raised to be royalty. They have been unfamiliar with the lives of "commoners". Enter Diana, who is lovely and not raised as royalty. And she falls in love with her betrothed. She did produce heirs, but she expected more. Love and respect in return from her husband..which she did not receive. Where was she supposed to fit in after she served her purpose? That was the tragedy. So she lived a troubled life in private, but in public, she did claim the hearts of us "commoners".

Everytime I see pictures of her sons, it is Diana I see, not Charles.


here here .I think there will only be one diana

el guapo;633021 wrote: wrong gordon brown ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


Now I'm really depressed. actually I reckon there is a very real possibility he might lose his seat at the next election. For years his constituency was one of the most die hard labour seats in scotland. Given the number odf one time labour party members ripping up their membership cards you never know.

along-for-the-ride;632271 wrote: About the program....does British TV have a "sweeps week" as they do here in the States. They'll just about show anything on TV for ratings. If enough people did not watch, won't they be surprised.

I have recently finished reading a book about the Royal Family. There was a time when the Queen would not let "divorced persons" in her presence. The few photos I have seen of a younger Queen smiling, she was radiant. She and her son Charles are raised to be royalty. They have been unfamiliar with the lives of "commoners". Enter Diana, who is lovely and not raised as royalty. And she falls in love with her betrothed. She did produce heirs, but she expected more. Love and respect in return from her husband..which she did not receive. Where was she supposed to fit in after she served her purpose? That was the tragedy. So she lived a troubled life in private, but in public, she did claim the hearts of us "commoners".

Everytime I see pictures of her sons, it is Diana I see, not Charles.


I never watched the programme, because I think as much about the royal family as they do of me.

Regarding the accident (or whatever if you want to make more of it), the whole episode has been put under a microscope scores of times. What I can't understand is why there is such a public outcry about her dying moments being shown on television. Sure it's personal, and not particularly enjoyable to watch, but dammit, WHAT ABOUT JOHN F. KENNEDY'S ASSASSINATION?? The last forty seconds of his life have been shown around the world HUNDREDS OF TIMES, AND YET THERE'S NOT A MURMER OF PROTEST. Don't you think he had dependents, too?

weinbeck;634657 wrote: I never watched the programme, because I think as much about the royal family as they do of me.

Regarding the accident (or whatever if you want to make more of it), the whole episode has been put under a microscope scores of times. What I can't understand is why there is such a public outcry about her dying moments being shown on television. Sure it's personal, and not particularly enjoyable to watch, but dammit, WHAT ABOUT JOHN F. KENNEDY'S ASSASSINATION?? The last forty seconds of his life have been shown around the world HUNDREDS OF TIMES, AND YET THERE'S NOT A MURMER OF PROTEST. Don't you think he had dependents, too?


that was what my husband said,