+ Visit Burnley FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 66

Thread: Queens Funeral

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    I have no idea about the veracity of what my own dearly departed mother once claimed that Charlie was not allowed to marry Camilla because she was not deemed to be a virgin.

    If that was true it didn't turn out at all well for the "People's Princess" did it.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by alfinyalcabo View Post
    Absolutely fantastic and riveting viewing.Enjoying every minute.We Brits know how to do things properly.
    GSTK..
    It seems to me Alf the woke and the Royal haters , got us all wrong again, the royal reign and public interest is alive and kicking and imo anyway stronger than before , long live the King.

    It was a spectacle to behold - you had to see it to believe it - Queen Elizabeth was obviously loved a lot more than many thought.

    What a send off it was.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    25,138
    Quote Originally Posted by army88 View Post
    It seems to me Alf the woke and the Royal haters , got us all wrong again, the royal reign and public interest is alive and kicking and imo anyway stronger than before , long live the King.

    It was a spectacle to behold - you had to see it to believe it - Queen Elizabeth was obviously loved a lot more than many thought.

    What a send off it was.
    Well said army, there is another period of mourning commencing now, for Republicanism, The great British public have just interred that, if not for ever, for the next 50 years at least.

    Republicanism, dead and buried along with our late, great Queen Elizabeth. RIP the both of you.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    8,716
    Let's simplify the whole issue of uniform or not. Charles stuck with the Royal protocol, as followed by his mother, in that non-working Royals are not allowed to wear uniforms and have had to relinquish their honorary military titles.
    Had Charles gone against this ruling it would have opened the door for the media to go OTT as they always do and many of the public would have followed suit. Harry has chosen to move abroad and has ceased to be a working Royal, whilst Andrew, who has not been found guilty of any offence and is able to wander around freely, was withdrawn from his role as a working Royal by his mother, probably as much to save him from further harrassment rather than any other reason.

    I served 23 years and had to hand in all my 6 uniforms when I left and nothing has changed, although I do know a few who managed to keep items and others who have since bought second-hand uniforms on various sites.

    Let's face it, there is only one family in the whole of the United Kingdom that is constantly under scrutiny and Charles has played to the rules but is now accused of vindictiveness, even though he did allow both Harry and Andrew to don their uniforms when they kept vigil in Westminster Hall.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    4,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Supersub6 View Post
    Let's simplify the whole issue of uniform or not. Charles stuck with the Royal protocol, as followed by his mother, in that non-working Royals are not allowed to wear uniforms and have had to relinquish their honorary military titles.
    Had Charles gone against this ruling it would have opened the door for the media to go OTT as they always do and many of the public would have followed suit. Harry has chosen to move abroad and has ceased to be a working Royal, whilst Andrew, who has not been found guilty of any offence and is able to wander around freely, was withdrawn from his role as a working Royal by his mother, probably as much to save him from further harrassment rather than any other reason.

    I served 23 years and had to hand in all my 6 uniforms when I left and nothing has changed, although I do know a few who managed to keep items and others who have since bought second-hand uniforms on various sites.

    Let's face it, there is only one family in the whole of the United Kingdom that is constantly under scrutiny and Charles has played to the rules but is now accused of vindictiveness, even though he did allow both Harry and Andrew to don their uniforms when they kept vigil in Westminster Hall.
    Once again Supersub in a world full of confusion you sound the voice of reason. Long may it continue. Are we still allowed to say that?

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Supersub6 View Post
    Let's simplify the whole issue of uniform or not. Charles stuck with the Royal protocol, as followed by his mother, in that non-working Royals are not allowed to wear uniforms and have had to relinquish their honorary military titles.
    Had Charles gone against this ruling it would have opened the door for the media to go OTT as they always do and many of the public would have followed suit. Harry has chosen to move abroad and has ceased to be a working Royal, whilst Andrew, who has not been found guilty of any offence and is able to wander around freely, was withdrawn from his role as a working Royal by his mother, probably as much to save him from further harrassment rather than any other reason.

    I served 23 years and had to hand in all my 6 uniforms when I left and nothing has changed, although I do know a few who managed to keep items and others who have since bought second-hand uniforms on various sites.

    Let's face it, there is only one family in the whole of the United Kingdom that is constantly under scrutiny and Charles has played to the rules but is now accused of vindictiveness, even though he did allow both Harry and Andrew to don their uniforms when they kept vigil in Westminster Hall.
    Trouble was Supersub6 the Queen was dead. Charles could have set his own protocol, but he refused to do so.

    One thing looks deathly certain, Harry and Andrew had better start writing "tell-all" books for a living otherwise they will be skint.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    873
    Quote Originally Posted by Supersub6 View Post
    Let's simplify the whole issue of uniform or not. Charles stuck with the Royal protocol, as followed by his mother, in that non-working Royals are not allowed to wear uniforms and have had to relinquish their honorary military titles.
    Had Charles gone against this ruling it would have opened the door for the media to go OTT as they always do and many of the public would have followed suit. Harry has chosen to move abroad and has ceased to be a working Royal, whilst Andrew, who has not been found guilty of any offence and is able to wander around freely, was withdrawn from his role as a working Royal by his mother, probably as much to save him from further harrassment rather than any other reason.

    I served 23 years and had to hand in all my 6 uniforms when I left and nothing has changed, although I do know a few who managed to keep items and others who have since bought second-hand uniforms on various sites.

    Let's face it, there is only one family in the whole of the United Kingdom that is constantly under scrutiny and Charles has played to the rules but is now accused of vindictiveness, even though he did allow both Harry and Andrew to don their uniforms when they kept vigil in Westminster Hall.
    I am not sure that Charles did stick to what was laid down by the Queen. When the Duke of Edinburgh died there was the same debate over who could wear military uniforms. It was the Queen that decreed that no one would wear a military uniform so as not to divide the family. So I think this was down to Charles, the rule as I understand it is the honour to wear the uniform is for members of the royal household, there is no wording to say it only applies to working royals.

    I will admit that since Charles treatment of the former Princess of Wales, which I thought was exceptionally poor I have had no time whatsoever for the man, so I may give a biased view, but it what I believe.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    8,716
    Quote Originally Posted by Vintage Claret View Post
    I am not sure that Charles did stick to what was laid down by the Queen. When the Duke of Edinburgh died there was the same debate over who could wear military uniforms. It was the Queen that decreed that no one would wear a military uniform so as not to divide the family. So I think this was down to Charles, the rule as I understand it is the honour to wear the uniform is for members of the royal household, there is no wording to say it only applies to working royals.

    I will admit that since Charles treatment of the former Princess of Wales, which I thought was exceptionally poor I have had no time whatsoever for the man, so I may give a biased view, but it what I believe.
    Working Royals are given honorary titles allowing them to wear military uniforms. In the UK, retired military veterans are not allowed to wear a uniform unless they have been granted an honorary title and have been permitted to wear one.
    Harry's honorary military appointments were taken of him when he decided to skip off to the USA. Andrew's were stripped in January and these were then re-distributed at the Queen's behest to other working members of the Royal family.

    Personally, I have no feelings either way about Charles or Diana, having met them both several times, the ony thing that I will say is that there will always be 'us and them' and never, ever think that this will change, even if the Repulicans get their way, there will be plenty of 'haves' who will continue the process ad nauseam.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    873
    While I have no time for Charles, I would hate to see our country become a republic. My forlorn hope was that Queen Elizabeth may have out lived her eldest son with William becoming the King, but that was not to be.
    .
    I like the idea of having someone as head of state who is supposed to be non-political a job the Queen did admirably.

    If we were unfortunate to become a republic. I could not imagine anything worse than President Rees-Mogg or President Corbyn.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    25,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Vintage Claret View Post
    I could not imagine anything worse than President Rees-Mogg or President Corbyn.
    I think President Blair might run them close VC, but I agree with you, a constitutional monarchy is the least bad system.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Forum Info

Footymad Forums offer you the chance to interact and discuss all things football with fellow fans from around the world, and share your views on footballing issues from the latest, breaking transfer rumours to the state of the game at international level and everything in between.

Whether your team is battling it out for the Premier League title or struggling for League survival, there's a forum for you!

Gooners, Mackems, Tractor Boys - you're all welcome, please just remember to respect the opinions of others.

Click here for a full list of the hundreds of forums available to you

The forums are free to join, although you must play fair and abide by the rules explained here, otherwise your ability to post may be temporarily or permanently revoked.

So what are you waiting for? Register now and join the debate!

(these forums are not actively moderated, so if you wish to report any comment made by another member please report it.)



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •