The "Royals" Thread
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: The "Royals" Thread
Meanwhile, back at Balmoral
Prince Andrew's lawyers accept he was served with US case papers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58682356
Prince Andrew's lawyers accept he was served with US case papers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58682356
-
- Posts: 2519
- Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 11:16am
Re: The "Royals" Thread
What was it they said about Clement Atlee -"A very modest man, with much to be modest about"! Definitely a grey man in a grey suit.
I say hook em all up to polygraph machines set to a form of lethal mode, then question them MM
I say hook em all up to polygraph machines set to a form of lethal mode, then question them MM
Re: The "Royals" Thread
Attlee's government created 'services' whose first priority was to serve the people - Railways, Gas, electricity, National Health Service et al - not to give first priority to making investors, entrepreneurs and the ruling class generally richer (and shareholders).merseymouth wrote: ↑25 Sep 2021, 11:46am What was it they said about Clement Atlee -"A very modest man, with much to be modest about"! Definitely a grey man in a grey suit.
I say hook em all up to polygraph machines set to a form of lethal mode, then question them MM
That was reversed, of course, by thatcher and it's governments.
Actually,this has the potential to deteriorate into an argument which could rage forever, and I won't be entering it.
I was clumsy to start this,but basically I was saying that I see the Queen (as a human being) and the ruling class as occupying opposite ends of the spectrum.
Re: The "Royals" Thread
So all his silly games have achieved is to provide the press with more column inches and to keep the story in prominence for longer. Had he just accepted the service when it was made there would have been no news until next hearing!thirdcrank wrote: ↑25 Sep 2021, 8:09am Meanwhile, back at Balmoral
Prince Andrew's lawyers accept he was served with US case papers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58682356
Ian
Re: The "Royals" Thread
Yes - you're right about that. It may also be wondered whether he's been badly advised.Psamathe wrote: ↑25 Sep 2021, 9:02pmSo all his silly games have achieved is to provide the press with more column inches and to keep the story in prominence for longer. Had he just accepted the service when it was made there would have been no news until next hearing!thirdcrank wrote: ↑25 Sep 2021, 8:09am Meanwhile, back at Balmoral
Prince Andrew's lawyers accept he was served with US case papers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58682356
Ian
I think that he was very badly advised to take part in that TV interview ...........all those months ago.
I got the impression that then whole thing was set up to make him look bad.
How unhappy it must be making the Queen.
Re: The "Royals" Thread
The Queen is about as opposite to the ruling class as ice is to frozen water.JohnW wrote: ↑25 Sep 2021, 4:46pmAttlee's government created 'services' whose first priority was to serve the people - Railways, Gas, electricity, National Health Service et al - not to give first priority to making investors, entrepreneurs and the ruling class generally richer (and shareholders).merseymouth wrote: ↑25 Sep 2021, 11:46am What was it they said about Clement Atlee -"A very modest man, with much to be modest about"! Definitely a grey man in a grey suit.
I say hook em all up to polygraph machines set to a form of lethal mode, then question them MM
That was reversed, of course, by thatcher and it's governments.
Actually,this has the potential to deteriorate into an argument which could rage forever, and I won't be entering it.
I was clumsy to start this,but basically I was saying that I see the Queen (as a human being) and the ruling class as occupying opposite ends of the spectrum.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
Re: The "Royals" Thread
I was referring to the Queen as a human being,and not as a member of the ruling class.
I'm not thinking about her 'status'or 'rank', but simply her humanity..........
I submit that humanity is a very rare quality in the ruling class......................for generations.
Their history and behaviour since William the Conqueror are a disgrace to humanity
We probably agree on that - but the Queen is still a woman, a mother, a grandmother, great-grandmother and has indicated human feelings.
Last edited by JohnW on 27 Sep 2021, 5:34pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: The "Royals" Thread
Instead of marching them up and down, the Grand Old Duke of York might usefully deploy his men on HGV driving duties
Re: The "Royals" Thread
For the benefit of others? - the ruling class? - don't hold your breath!thirdcrank wrote: ↑27 Sep 2021, 5:19pm Instead of marching them up and down, the Grand Old Duke of York might usefully deploy his men on HGV driving duties
Nice one though tc
Incidentally,the 'bus services locally (Hx/Bfd/Leeds) are in the same parlous state.
Re: The "Royals" Thread
Not "they" twas Winston Churchill - something of a snide comment IMO.merseymouth wrote: ↑25 Sep 2021, 11:46am What was it they said about Clement Atlee -"A very modest man, with much to be modest about"! Definitely a grey man in a grey suit.
I say hook em all up to polygraph machines set to a form of lethal mode, then question them MM
Re: The "Royals" Thread
What humanity? The fact she's upset over what's happening to her favourite son at the moment.? She didn't appear to give a damn about Diana once she'd produced the required heir and spare.JohnW wrote: ↑27 Sep 2021, 4:23pmI was referring to the Queen as a human being,and not as a member of the ruling class.
I'm not thinking about her 'status'or 'rank', but simply her humanity..........
I submit that humanity is a very rare quality in the ruling class......................for generations.
Their history and behaviour since William the Conqueror are a disgrace to humanity
We probably agree on that - but the Queen is still a woman, a mother, a grandmother, great-grandmother and has indicated human feelings.
You're right, she's a human being as are the other members of the ruling class and many of whom are also women, mothers, grandmothers etc. They breed to perpetuate themselves.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
Re: The "Royals" Thread
Following on from that, some of our bus services have been cut due to the drivers refusing to drive busses that are too big along lanes and roads that are too narrow.
In all our 30odd years of living here, we never see a bus that is anywhere near full.
Why not use smaller busses, that are fit for the locality and fit for purpose?
Mick F. Cornwall
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: The "Royals" Thread
Nothing to do with the royal family but going back to the days of deregulation of bus services, the Bradford area with which both JohnW and I are familiar with had been served by the City of Bradford transport dept and others. Independent operators flooded the area with small buses which were very poor vehicles and were soon withdrawn. IIRC, this was about the same sort of time when the narrow medieval streets of York acquired lengthy bendy buses.
Re: The "Royals" Thread
"Exclusive: Queen spending millions to fund Prince Andrew’s fight against sex abuse allegations":
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-famil ... e-andrews/
(Paywalled)
"The Queen is privately funding the Duke of York’s legal fight against sex abuse allegations to the tune of millions of pounds, the Telegraph understands."
"Royal courtiers accept that the overall legal bill will run into millions, with the civil case likely to drag on for months or even years. The prospect of a potential settlement, or damages payout, could cost many millions more on top."
Jonathan
Re: The "Royals" Thread
Non paywalled report in the IndependentJdsk wrote: ↑2 Oct 2021, 10:23am"Exclusive: Queen spending millions to fund Prince Andrew’s fight against sex abuse allegations":
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-famil ... e-andrews/
(Paywalled)
"The Queen is privately funding the Duke of York’s legal fight against sex abuse allegations to the tune of millions of pounds, the Telegraph understands."
"Royal courtiers accept that the overall legal bill will run into millions, with the civil case likely to drag on for months or even years. The prospect of a potential settlement, or damages payout, could cost many millions more on top."
Jonathan
Ianhttps://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/queen-prince-andrew-epstein-millions-legal-case-b1931084.html wrote:Queen ‘to spend millions funding Prince Andrew’s defence against sex abuse claims’