Is Prince Harry revolting?

378 posts in this topic

31 minutes ago, dessa_dangerous said:

if you replace "for" with "to", he's not wrong.  Why squabble over semantics? 

*Empire mode on*

 

What is the loss of land and life compared to the civilization, education and prosperity they (The royals as head of the empire) brought to those people?

 

*empire mode off*

 

Jokes aside, I've heard people say this in the last 5 years... It's a level of stupid that is hard to comprehend.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just imagine being a lover of virtually any political leader  or Head of State otherwise in 2021. There are some wierdo Presidents around as well. And Prime Ministers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, john g. said:

Just imagine being a lover of virtually any political leader  or Head of State otherwise in 2021. There are some wierdo Presidents around as well. And Prime Ministers.

 

True, but they leave eventually. This funky bunch is in it for life.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also true! That is the difference involving a parliamentary system! 
But the elites still get into power! When was the last time a poor American became President?

( have nothing against successful people, by the way - quite the opposite)..

People from poor backgrounds can often be the nastiest sons of bitches once they have a sniff of power.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All future parents wonder how their baby will look like, for God's sake. it is totally natural. Or whether the baby will be born healthy bla bla bla.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they don't think he is an actual blood relative it may explain why they chose to draw the line of financing security and dishing out titles with Harry and his progeny. Obviously, it has to stop somewhere. But this adds to the body of doubt re Harry's paternity. Blood and water an' all that.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, optimista said:

If they don't think he is an actual blood relative it may explain why they chose to draw the line of financing security and dishing out titles with Harry and his progeny. Obviously, it has to stop somewhere. But this adds to the body of doubt re Harry's paternity. Blood and water an' all that.

 

I am convinced the Palace had a few discreet paternity tests performed back in the day... since this subject never was broached, I'd conjecture the doubts are true.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They would hardly broadcast it... if you dig around a bit you can find plenty of stuff they covered up over the years. Princess Ann's first hubby exited quick when his mistress produced an illigitimate daughter. For example. Never hit the press back in the day. One wonders how.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who denies being racist convicts him/herself with those words.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

same goes for anyone who breaks their neck rushing to their defense.  Better to say "hmm not sure, looks bad but who knows" than "OH, YOU'RE OVERREACTING, SURELY."

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/03/2021, 00:32:34, katheliz said:

Anyone who denies being racist convicts him/herself with those words.

This is exactly what I thought.

 

i don’t think that I myself am particularly racist but how can I know? If a black or ethnic minority person thinks I am, then they must be right - as they can tell. I try to treat everyone fairly and equitably but have no idea which subconscious biases might be in play.

 

it is like when I chat to my chap about women’s rights. Because he is a white male he just doesn’t see the situations where I, as a white woman, do see the disadvantages for women. So I must be equally blind to other discrimination such as racism, gender etc.

 

so William saying ‘we aren’t a racist family’ is clearly wrong as Meghan has said they are. If he had said “my family try their best to be inclusive, I hope we aren’t racist and we will do all we can to treat all people equally” then that would be fine. But he didn’t say that, he inferred Meghan was wrong.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But we arent talking racism here... its colour prejudice...   or have I missed sommat... ?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/03/2021, 22:46:43, john g. said:

Just imagine being a lover of virtually any political leader  or Head of State otherwise in 2021. There are some wierdo Presidents around as well. And Prime Ministers.

 

I wonder if the Prime Minister not being a head of state explains why British people are so informal when talking about Prime Ministers - and we have a long history of lampooning them as well. 

 

If you look at the US, there is a big thing about addressing people who are either in office or have held office, as "Mr. President" or "Mr. Vice President" respectively, whereas in the UK I can remember growing up with people calling the PM "Maggie", and then in my teenage years watching puppets of John Major eating peas and being treated like a punchbag at PMQs. There was never the same Pomp and Circumstance with political office - okay, the MPs themselves have to address each other by constituencies and office titles, but the public wouldn't use this (David Cameron even asked for people to call him "Dave" instead of David, which for a lot of us makes us think of Trigger and Rodney in Only Fools and Horses).  

 

The system does have some advantages, since I'd imagine being welcomed by BoJo at a state event would be akin to having the same event hosted by a circus clown.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now