|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:30 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:31 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:38 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:05 am
|
|
|
|
Invictus_88 Because by most accounts, Diana was a manipulative cheating b***h and Camilla the down to earth and supportive friend. From what I've seen, Charles was cheating on Diana with Camilla...
illyrianth tombrend I believe that it was just decided that he would still be allowed to succed to the throne. Now THAT...that I cannot agree with at all. Personally, my loyalty to the crown will be tested if not totally shattered if he ever attains the throne. I realise it makes no difference to him or anyone else, but it is a crying shame to my mind. For some reason I don't like the idea of Charles being King. From what I've read, he is now seeming to be a bit of a bumbling fool, which a good king does not make.
Quote: The royal family don't actually really DO anything anyway. Look at the Monarchy thread, and save yourself being torn apart here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:17 pm
|
|
|
|
Zoutout Invictus_88 Because by most accounts, Diana was a manipulative cheating b***h and Camilla the down to earth and supportive friend. From what I've seen, Charles was cheating on Diana with Camilla... illyrianth tombrend I believe that it was just decided that he would still be allowed to succed to the throne. Now THAT...that I cannot agree with at all. Personally, my loyalty to the crown will be tested if not totally shattered if he ever attains the throne. I realise it makes no difference to him or anyone else, but it is a crying shame to my mind. For some reason I don't like the idea of Charles being King. From what I've read, he is now seeming to be a bit of a bumbling fool, which a good king does not make. Quote: The royal family don't actually really DO anything anyway. Look at the Monarchy thread, and save yourself being torn apart here. Well, they don't do anything. Not directly, anyway. Of course it's important that they're there, but that's all they really need to do, apart from wave at the odd important person. Don't get me wrong, I think they're presence in our society is an absolute necessity, but in normal circumstances, nothing in particular is required of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:26 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 09, 2005 2:16 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:57 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:22 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:30 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:31 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:34 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:39 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:45 am
|
|
|
|
and_solo_said Invictus_88 and_solo_said Well...I suppose it's fitting with the decline of this country that the Letcherous king has his whore become queen... Heh, lechery isn't a new idea. It's been prevalent throughout British history, even (some would say especially) when we ruled the world.
Personally, I blame the chavs for the decline.Well, not only the chavs, you're forgetting the 'gangstas' and the posh ones who want to be chavs but are too rich
..oh, and trustafarians. stare
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 10:16 am
|
|
|
|
Invictus_88 and_solo_said Invictus_88 and_solo_said Well...I suppose it's fitting with the decline of this country that the Letcherous king has his whore become queen... Heh, lechery isn't a new idea. It's been prevalent throughout British history, even (some would say especially) when we ruled the world.
Personally, I blame the chavs for the decline.Well, not only the chavs, you're forgetting the 'gangstas' and the posh ones who want to be chavs but are too rich ..oh, and trustafarians. stare
They have a NAME? eek
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|