Author Topic: Royal Family Watch  (Read 133473 times)

Sam

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Ulcerated by happiness
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #90 on: November 05, 2016, 02:04:43 PM »
Ci-devant cockroaches who should all be funnelled into meat grinders. They have no purpose, no fibre; they are contorted marionettes in a sick revue.

touchingcloth

  • Member
  • **
  • You wanna plack the rick, you ha.
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #91 on: November 08, 2016, 11:59:17 AM »
Both the Guardian and BBC are currently reporting - as "breaking news" - that Harry has had his privacy violated by press speculation about whether he's in a relationship. Leaving aside the very impossibility for that to be breaking news in the truest sense of either word, perhaps the Hewitt cunt should renounce his royalship if he values his privacy more than his misappropriated wealth and his absolute nonsense excuses for careers.

Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #92 on: November 08, 2016, 12:02:52 PM »
The Guardian are reporting it more that he's complaining about the racist and mysoginsitic coverage rather than his privacy being invaded.

BlodwynPig

  • The Last Living Member of COVID-20
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #93 on: November 08, 2016, 12:10:42 PM »
The Guardian are reporting it more that he's complaining about the racist and mysoginsitic coverage rather than his privacy being invaded.

Bloody ginger kraut

Blue Jam

  • Crabs is sewage-proof
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #94 on: November 08, 2016, 08:14:52 PM »
Hmmmm, this new potential Princess Banter- American, mixed-race, divorcee... she's already among my picks for Death List MMXVII. I bet Prince Philip is busy haggling for another white Fiat Uno as I type.

I understand some nude photos of her have also been leaked but so fucking what- Banter Harry has already been there and done that.

touchingcloth

  • Member
  • **
  • You wanna plack the rick, you ha.
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #95 on: November 08, 2016, 09:45:09 PM »
Let's see these nudes.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Mr Moose is up! It's done done done!
    • http://jackanderton.jamendo.net/
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #96 on: November 08, 2016, 10:20:19 PM »
Wanting to view the nudes of a woman who conjoins her fluids with Inbred Helicopter Murderer is like coveting an eczema skin graft.

Outrageous, entitled and absurd. I hope an underwhelming maze scuppers their next charity drive.

Blue Jam

  • Crabs is sewage-proof
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #97 on: November 08, 2016, 11:15:13 PM »
perhaps the Hewitt cunt should renounce his royalship if he values his privacy more than his misappropriated wealth and his absolute nonsense excuses for careers.

If Banter Harry had any sense he would abdicate, then he'd be free to grow old disgracefully with his American wife. They'd be like Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, only Harry would be the one wearing the Nazi armband.

touchingcloth

  • Member
  • **
  • You wanna plack the rick, you ha.
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #98 on: November 09, 2016, 12:31:12 AM »
Let's see these nudes.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Mr Moose is up! It's done done done!
    • http://jackanderton.jamendo.net/
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #99 on: November 10, 2016, 12:00:09 AM »
I hope they have been eaten by some sort of blind dune-dwelling worm golem. Along with the living bodies of all the 'family'.

BlodwynPig

  • The Last Living Member of COVID-20
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #100 on: November 10, 2016, 12:13:51 AM »
Why would anyone want to be photographed nude?

BlodwynPig

  • The Last Living Member of COVID-20
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #101 on: November 10, 2016, 12:14:28 AM »
Apart from an errant chimp of course, or mole rat

BritishHobo

  • That is a really reductive impression
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #102 on: November 10, 2016, 07:37:13 AM »
The Daily Mail is clearly fucked off about Harry's letter, but doesn't want to actually own up to that becau slagging off a royal is bad treason.

Apart from Sarah Vine, who's done a stampy-feet tantrum article.

Blumf

  • Not long now
    • IGNORE ME!!!
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #103 on: November 10, 2016, 11:37:52 AM »
Wanting to view the nudes of a woman who conjoins her fluids with Inbred Helicopter Murderer is like coveting an eczema skin graft.

Ah, but sir, let me counter with the fact that Prince Bantz of Ledge does not want you to imbibe the nudie images. Doing so is an affront to him and troubles the not-so-young burden on humanity deeply. Bearing such in mind, do you still not want to look at the naked nobody's lady bits?

Shoulders?-Stomach!

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Mr Moose is up! It's done done done!
    • http://jackanderton.jamendo.net/
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #104 on: November 10, 2016, 01:44:38 PM »
No, because there are so so many better ways of irritating him, such as disposing of the gored corpses of his family members in a disused grain silo.

touchingcloth

  • Member
  • **
  • You wanna plack the rick, you ha.
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #105 on: November 11, 2016, 11:03:34 PM »
Someone please batter the living pair of bollocks off of each of these grasping Cunts, especially the little vagina having one.

George Oscar Bluth II

  • Karma: +69 / -420
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #106 on: November 18, 2016, 12:34:39 PM »
Quote
The Government has announced funding for the Royal Family will almost double for the next ten years to fund renovation of Buckingham Palace

Quote
The Government says a ten-year refit at Buckingham Palace will cost £369m in order to "future-proof" the residence

Incidentally, just ten days ago the benefit cap was brought down to £20k a year including rent, reducing the income of 40,000 single parent families by as much as £7k a year.

fit bird

  • fit bird
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #107 on: November 18, 2016, 12:42:52 PM »
It is estimated that the benefits of the upgrade, including longer summer opening hours, more private tours and savings due to the improvements, could be worth around £3.4m each year. So when you really think about it, it'll pay for itself in no time.

Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #108 on: November 18, 2016, 12:45:09 PM »
Before Liz carks it, probably.

George Oscar Bluth II

  • Karma: +69 / -420
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #109 on: November 18, 2016, 01:00:35 PM »
Spend the £369m to knock down Buckingham Palace and build a multistorey carpark on the site imo.

Thomas

  • please describe an encounter with a squirrel
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #110 on: November 18, 2016, 01:09:57 PM »
'Future-proofing' the palace.

Is it possible - or just conspiratorial of me to imagine - that there might be a bit of 'future-proofing' in recent popular media regarding the royal family? ITV's Victoria and Netflix's The Crown, for example. I wonder if the image of royalty is being warmed up to prepare for the Queen's demise. Keeping the idea of royalty popular for when they have to pass the throne on to the next guy.

Might just be telly though.

George Oscar Bluth II

  • Karma: +69 / -420
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #111 on: November 18, 2016, 01:20:42 PM »
That's been underway since Diana was murdered and they realised how unpopular they actually were. They've spent millions on PR and it's done wonders for them.

The problem for them of course is that "Prince" William is slowly starting to look like his dad, and it's getting harder and harder to cover up how boring him and his wife are. Expect another backlash soon enough. It's only Banter Harry keeping them going at this point.

Absorb the anus burn

  • I'll serve raw potatoes at my summer party

Thomas

  • please describe an encounter with a squirrel
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #113 on: November 18, 2016, 01:35:29 PM »
That's been underway since Diana was murdered and they realised how unpopular they actually were. They've spent millions on PR and it's done wonders for them.

The problem for them of course is that "Prince" William is slowly starting to look like his dad, and it's getting harder and harder to cover up how boring him and his wife are. Expect another backlash soon enough. It's only Banter Harry keeping them going at this point.

I think Banter is looking even more like Charles now, but perhaps that's just a plastic surgery measure to stem gossip about James Hewitt.

This trifling matter of £369m might tip the tide of public opinion, especially as it's so poetically close to that mythical weekly £350m.

I must express my disagreement with the thread title, while I'm here. I just hope they get democratically dethroned, and the very idea of 'a royal family' looked back upon as a bit of embarrassment.

buttgammon

  • How thick is wall?
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #114 on: November 18, 2016, 01:43:15 PM »
I find it bizarre that benefit claimants are so vilified when these fuckers are leeching hundreds of millions off the state. It goes to show what a relentless spew of media propaganda can do.

That's been underway since Diana was murdered and they realised how unpopular they actually were. They've spent millions on PR and it's done wonders for them.

The problem for them of course is that "Prince" William is slowly starting to look like his dad, and it's getting harder and harder to cover up how boring him and his wife are. Expect another backlash soon enough. It's only Banter Harry keeping them going at this point.

A few times recently, I've found myself feeling more positive that public opinion is changing against the monarchy but every time I start to feel optimistic, I recall the effect PR has had in the past and wonder what it would take for them to permanently lose the public's sympathies. I've been a republican for a long time now and even to me, it seems more absurd the more I look at it. Living in a republic has made the monarchy seem even more ridiculous, which I didn't think was possible. Looking at the amount of money the country spends on the monarchy while diverting it from other sources, it is absolutely unjustifiable. True, any head of state costs money but compare this to, say, the President of Ireland (who I think actually asked to take a pay cut, who was democratically elected, and who is a charming and endearing old man who looks like a little gnome who has a dignity and decency the royal family could only dream of) and the royals are hardly value for money.

I've always wondered if public opinion would harden after the Queen's death but again, I suspect another PR campaign could get them out of a jam. That said, I know Prince Charles and Prince William are unpopular and I hope that when people see a head of state they dislike being forced upon them, they will realise that the monarchy is an expensive, outdated, undemocratic sham.

Absorb the anus burn

  • I'll serve raw potatoes at my summer party
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #115 on: November 18, 2016, 01:47:05 PM »

BlodwynPig

  • The Last Living Member of COVID-20
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #116 on: November 18, 2016, 01:48:36 PM »
Buck Palace is a heap of shit. There was some doc about it recently and most of the rooms apart from the ones you normally see, are like 1960s pantries or NHS vomitoriums.

BlodwynPig

  • The Last Living Member of COVID-20
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #117 on: November 18, 2016, 01:49:59 PM »
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/nov/18/buckingham-palace-to-undergo-370m-refurbishment#comments

The Guardian comments are worth reading too!

Didn't take many scrolls (0.1) to get to the meat

Quote
nikkisixx 1m ago

Rather have money spent on this than wasted on other rubbish. Least it will look nice. Better than spending it on bombs, tax breaks for the rich or benefits for those who cannot be asked to get out of bed.

George Oscar Bluth II

  • Karma: +69 / -420
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #118 on: November 18, 2016, 01:51:56 PM »
A few times recently, I've found myself feeling more positive that public opinion is changing against the monarchy but every time I start to feel optimistic, I recall the effect PR has had in the past and wonder what it would take for them to permanently lose the public's sympathies. I've been a republican for a long time now and even to me, it seems more absurd the more I look at it. Living in a republic has made the monarchy seem even more ridiculous, which I didn't think was possible. Looking at the amount of money the country spends on the monarchy while diverting it from other sources, it is absolutely unjustifiable. True, any head of state costs money but compare this to, say, the President of Ireland (who I think actually asked to take a pay cut, who was democratically elected, and who is a charming and endearing old man who looks like a little gnome who has a dignity and decency the royal family could only dream of) and the royals are hardly value for money.

I've always wondered if public opinion would harden after the Queen's death but again, I suspect another PR campaign could get them out of a jam. That said, I know Prince Charles and Prince William are unpopular and I hope that when people see a head of state they dislike being forced upon them, they will realise that the monarchy is an expensive, outdated, undemocratic sham.

It's the absurdity of it that gets me, as well as the mediocrity of the current royal family.

Whoever you are, whatever you achieve you can never be the head of state of this country, unless you were born into it. That's lunacy isn't it?

And for all the YOU WANT PRESIDENT BLAIR DO YOU? stuff from pro-Royalists...at least if it was President Blair someone would have fucking voted for him. I'm quite open to President Blair if that's what the people want.

Bingo Fury

  • Only qualified to work on sailors
Re: Royal Family Watch
« Reply #119 on: November 18, 2016, 06:07:06 PM »
Quote
nikkisixx 1m ago

Rather have money spent on this than wasted on other rubbish. Least it will look nice. Better than spending it on bombs, tax breaks for the rich or benefits for those who cannot be asked to get out of bed.

Is that one of those "another think/thing coming" phrases? Are there swathes of people who go about their daily lives in the belief that the term is "can't be asked"?