RE: the royal wedding

RE: the royal wedding (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 9:18:37 AM)
OBviously had good taste:) Susie, I thught Becks looked gorgeous but vicki looked like a well worn leather broom in a black sack, but thats just me.

sexyred1 -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 9:24:33 AM)
I thought the wedding was lovely, the clothes were as well and I thought the hats were very whimsical. I thought the couple looked beautiful. And don't be so hard on Victoria; she is very pregnant and I thought she looked fine, as she usually does.

Phoenixpower -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 9:54:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze quote: ORIGINAL: ranja lucy i'm glad you enjoyed it. so did i. i'm import Brit impressive affair, very well executed, great advertisement for London!!!! Ewwww, yeah over 20 million £ just for the costs of the Metropolitian police, in times when they raise the taxes and cut funding for about everything the plebs needs, how wonderful to waste so much money for a wedding most of the country doesn't really want or care about, it would be better spent on schools and hospitals, not on two rich kids getting married. [sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=agree.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif]

popeye1250 -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 11:18:52 AM)
Ha, I was flipping around the channels last night and it seemed like every station had at least one gay guy commentator absolutely gushing about the wedding. lol Why do gay guys like weddings? PaHunk, what's up with that? Even Anderson Cooper was ooohing and ahhhing.

NocturnalStalker -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 11:33:58 AM)
I was disappointed there was no assassination to spice things up.

ranja -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 11:38:09 AM)
that's 'cos due to the recession termyn8tor didn't have the dosh to rent the apartment or by the rifle

hlen5 -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 12:15:55 PM)
I didn't watch the wedding. I went to yahoo to see the dress. I wish them all the best. I think part of the reason people are interested is the shared history of our countries. You don't have to believe in the Monarchy (as we obviously don't) to be happy for the royal family. I think part of the US interest in UK's royalty is the fact we consider the UK our best allies. The people here that are gaga about the wedding and the house of Windsor aren't as excited about any other European nobility.

popeye1250 -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 12:57:03 PM)
I saw the pictures of the happy couple on Yahoo and I thought of that Beatles song, "Sargeant Pepper."

Zonie63 -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 1:47:47 PM)
I'm not really all that fascinated with royalty, but I wonder why there's so much endless coverage about the royal wedding. Is it really that important? I'm fascinated by history, though, and maybe past royalty might be significant and interesting. The Romanovs are a rather fascinating study. But in seeing all this royal wedding coverage, it's like watching the Godfather Part III. You just know their best days are behind them.

numuncular -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 3:15:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phoenixpower quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze quote: ORIGINAL: ranja lucy i'm glad you enjoyed it. so did i. i'm import Brit impressive affair, very well executed, great advertisement for London!!!! Ewwww, yeah over 20 million £ just for the costs of the Metropolitian police, in times when they raise the taxes and cut funding for about everything the plebs needs, how wonderful to waste so much money for a wedding most of the country doesn't really want or care about, it would be better spent on schools and hospitals, not on two rich kids getting married. [sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=agree.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif] the cost of it (and of the monarchy in general) is actually irrelevant, and its really counterproductive to get involved in discussions about the cost. its not the cost thats the problem, its the bizarre and anachronistic idea that a head of state should be decided on the hereditary principle, and even worse that to continue this William must - or else he'd have ran a mile - geniunely believe that he has a divine right to rule Britain and the Commonwealth.

PeonForHer -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 3:47:36 PM)
FR Just had word: lots of the UK's anti-royal sites on Facebook were closed down today. They couldn't be accessed. What really boils my piss about royalists is that they can't stand knowing that non-royalists even exist. It ruins their vibe. Oh well, it's all over till the next big royal event when again and as always, pop will go the democracy and any toleration of dissent. And out will come the farties, happily waving their little Union Jack flags and proudly sporting their lobotomy scars.

numuncular -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 3:57:46 PM)
quote: he cost thats the problem, its the bizarre and anachronistic idea that a head of state should be decided on the hereditary principle, quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR Just had word: lots of the UK's anti-royal sites on Facebook were closed down today. They couldn't be accessed. it was left wing sites in general, and ones more concerned with the anti-cuts movement than with the anti monarchy http://blog.ucloccupation.com/2011/04/29/over-50-political-accounts-deleted-in-facebook-purge/

PeonForHer -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 4:03:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: numuncular it was left wing sites in general, and ones more concerned with the anti-cuts movement than with the anti monarchy http://blog.ucloccupation.com/2011/04/29/over-50-political-accounts-deleted-in-facebook-purge/ Not from what I've heard. Any groups, basically, that might conceivably organise anything disruptive around the wedding. Anti-cuts groups in general have been pretty critical of the wedding. But whatever: it's kind of unnerving, most especially because the sites went down at this specific time. I find this news really bloody unpleasant.

numuncular -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 4:11:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: numuncular it was left wing sites in general, and ones more concerned with the anti-cuts movement than with the anti monarchy http://blog.ucloccupation.com/2011/04/29/over-50-political-accounts-deleted-in-facebook-purge/ Not from what I've heard. Any groups, basically, that might conceivably organise anything disruptive around the wedding. Anti-cuts groups in general have been pretty critical of the wedding. But whatever: it's kind of unnerving, most especially because the sites went down at this specific time. I find this news really bloody unpleasant. well, you may well have heard different things but I dont know of any specific named anti-monarchy groups that have gone down. strangely one of the most active and influential regional anti-cuts groups has been untouched - which is where I read about this.

PeonForHer -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 4:28:16 PM)
I'm on the phone with one of the organisers of the wiped sites . . . Jeez . . .

littlewonder -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 4:35:24 PM)
THe ceremony and surroundings were beautiful. I loved the trees that will later be replanted. It gave it almost a medieval outdoor wedding feel. It sorta reminded me of Sleeping Beauty for some reason. I loved the classic, elegant gown. It was understated but fit her well. I don't understand why she wore her hair down though. I was hoping for a tight chignon with a little higher of a tiara. She still looked beautiful though. All my best wishes to them both.

PeonForHer -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 5:05:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: numuncular well, you may well have heard different things but I dont know of any specific named anti-monarchy groups that have gone down. strangely one of the most active and influential regional anti-cuts groups has been untouched - which is where I read about this. Here it is, Channel Four News - always the most liberal, and least into royal arselicking: http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/14669 But Facebook aren't saying anything other than about a bland TOS violation by these sites. No word, though, about why it all happened today. FB denies coming under pressure from the Met Police. How tawdry. And more than a bit disturbing.

Phoenixpower -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 5:13:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: numuncular quote: ORIGINAL: Phoenixpower quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze quote: ORIGINAL: ranja lucy i'm glad you enjoyed it. so did i. i'm import Brit impressive affair, very well executed, great advertisement for London!!!! Ewwww, yeah over 20 million £ just for the costs of the Metropolitian police, in times when they raise the taxes and cut funding for about everything the plebs needs, how wonderful to waste so much money for a wedding most of the country doesn't really want or care about, it would be better spent on schools and hospitals, not on two rich kids getting married. [sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=agree.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif] the cost of it (and of the monarchy in general) is actually irrelevant, and its really counterproductive to get involved in discussions about the cost. its not the cost thats the problem, its the bizarre and anachronistic idea that a head of state should be decided on the hereditary principle, and even worse that to continue this William must - or else he'd have ran a mile - geniunely believe that he has a divine right to rule Britain and the Commonwealth. Well, thats your view, doesn't have to be mine. Quite frankly when the royals are so concerned about their safety, then they can also quite frankly pay for the safety which is put in place for them. I couldn't care less about the hereditary principle, but quite frankly do care about when the general public has to pay up such astrononomic sums [8\|]

PeonForHer -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 5:19:42 PM)
Phoenixpower, Can I just say: thank you for restoring a bit of my faith in womankind here. [;)]

MzMinx -> RE: the royal wedding (4/29/2011 5:28:26 PM)
in australia ... one of our quite controversial satirist/comedy programs was actually refused permission to use the footage of the wedding. In an agreement between the BBC and the ABc (australian broadcasting commission), this happened on thursday before the wedding. 'Chasers war on everything' is the show and they where scheduled to do an alternative broadcast live on one of our digital chanels (like BBC 4 etc) against all the big stations doing the usal pomp and stuff.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.09375