Kate & Will - Wedding coverage

Herr Eisenheim said:
OMG not even this forum is safe :(
I am afraid to open a can these days as the royal couple might spring from it.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, it would appear "The Ministry of Silly Hats" is alive and well. Just the pictures make me wonder if any one of them pitched over face down, as the hats resembled hood ornaments for a Mack Truck. :rolleyes:
 
Herr Eisenheim said:
I dunno, I don't find them amusing at all.
There is something very sinister about English royals, I know Icke is most probably dis-info agent or just a nut case at best, but thanks to him I can easily imagine the queen as shape shifting blood thirsty reptoid :)
Her eyes are too cold, she gives me the creeps, the whole family does.

I think the royals are what they've been 'bred' to be: figureheads for the state. The older the royal, the more they've embraced the role made for them to play. The current queen is a prime example, osit.
 
Gimpy said:
Herr Eisenheim said:
I dunno, I don't find them amusing at all.
There is something very sinister about English royals, I know Icke is most probably dis-info agent or just a nut case at best, but thanks to him I can easily imagine the queen as shape shifting blood thirsty reptoid :)
Her eyes are too cold, she gives me the creeps, the whole family does.

I think the royals are what they've been 'bred' to be: figureheads for the state. The older the royal, the more they've embraced the role made for them to play. The current queen is a prime example, osit.

Actually, I think the Queen has managed quite well considering she has the instincts of a peasant. She was expected - and trained from childhood - to do a certain job and have no real private life at all. That has to have an effect on a person.

As for Icke - with all that "royal blood shape-shifting" nonsense, he's made a joke out of hyperdimensional truths.
 
Concerning hats and wearing hats, this little extract from the Monty Python movie "the meaning of life" may be related :)
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2QJvc_SxFQ
 
Did anyone saw the Joan Rivers Royal Fashion Police, it was hilarious!!!! I love that woman!
 
Re: Wedding coverage

Iron said:
What I found curious was that it was mostly girls watching the ceremony in places I passed while going to work. Some of then seemed to want to be in the shoes of the princess. A girl who willingly abdicated of her right of crying in public, among other things.

I was actually discussing this with a cab driver on Friday morning because he was baffled by the attention and media coverage that the wedding was getting here in Brazil. The cab driver was talking about how frustrated he was to see a bunch of people in a coffee shop leaning over to watch the local news about the wedding and then discussing it with "I wish it was me" kind of comments. Impossible not to agree with him!

Although I heard about the wedding some two weeks ago I didn't know about the hats. They're just comical! I never would've thought there could be some laughs in this royal wedding business! :)
 
Herr Eisenheim said:
I dunno, I don't find them amusing at all.
There is something very sinister about English royals, I know Icke is most probably dis-info agent or just a nut case at best, but thanks to him I can easily imagine the queen as shape shifting blood thirsty reptoid :)
Her eyes are too cold, she gives me the creeps, the whole family does.
Gruess Gott Mein Herr!

I can see where you are coming from here but I don't feel that way. They've been born and raised that way and they're the product of their upbringing just like anyone else. I lived for over one year near Balmoral in the Scottish Highlands and knew the people who worked for the Royal Family. They said, all things considered, they were as normal as you could expect.

One of my ladyfriends there was a highland dancer, she danced for Her Maj at the Braemar Games for some years and would present her with a bouquet of heather. She talked to her and said the same thing, as normal as you could expect.

Prince Charles threw a party for his regiment, The Gordon Highlanders, at the hotel I worked at. He was their Colonel in Chief. It was my job, decked out in a penguin suit, to keep the single malts flowing. Before the party we were briefed as to what was happening to the smallest detail.

Everything that HRH was to do that night was planned ahead to the finest detail. It was completely and wholly intrusive and would not be the sort of life I'd like. I was not to know that sort of life till I got married several years later! :scared:

I didn't talk to him that night, as he did the did the rounds and talked to all the men of the regiment but was frequently standing close by to provide fresh tumblers of whiskey. I could hear what he saying and could see his face. He seemed rather sad and dispirited, jaded. No sign of a tail David!

My overall impression that he was more or less a normal man born into extraordinary circumstances. I wouldn't like to be in his shoes.

The men of his regiment liked him also. Said he was a fair and decent man but constrained by his birth and upbringing.

Bye for now!

Brewer
 
I think we have to be careful about vectoring here.

The real "enemy" in our midst (if that's the right word) are the psychopaths - and to a certain extent their enablers: authoritarians. That might also include all of us. Insofar as we can't see the complete picture, we'll fall for the games that psychopaths play, and play our own mechanical roles within those psychopath-directed games.

This includes reaction to royalty. Royalty was introduced as part of a control system. Sometimes the monarch was the psychopath in control. But not always, in which case he was controlled by psychopaths in the background. And in those instances he could be eliminated if he didn't follow their plan (as with JFK, who was essentially a monarch, like any US president), or made a scapegoat. Elizabeth II and her family play that role, and it's like walking a tightrope. They've no power as such, but they're made to play a figurehead role, whether they really like it or not. If they don't play along, there will be hell to pay, and they know that.

There's a spectacle involved with monarchy, and perhaps there's a problem there - but then there's a problem with any spectacle: sports events, for example, or television, or whatever distracts us from what's really going on.

My personal take is that the Windsors aren't that likely to be psychopathic, and it's a waste of time vilifying them for what they aren't. They like horses, dogs and countryside - that seems to be where their real interest lies. That's not really all that surprising, given that they're surrounded by so many people at official functions who don't treat them as normal people. In effect they're excluded from real society, simply by being put on a pedestal. That can't be good for their general mental health. And I think they realise that.

The Queen's been known to take a pragmatic view of the whole thing, to treat the royal show as a business: "The Firm", I think she calls it. That sort of attitude at least allows some sort of detachment - but, crikey, it must take it out of you to keep up with that level of polite, interested public engagement.

Just a further couple of cents.
 
This wedding here in the states could not be avoided if you turned the mainstream news channels on. I was wanting information on the horrible storms here and had to wait until the "wedding" headlines past before I could see how things were doing. It seemed a bit surreal. Here the news anchors were jovial reporting about the wedding and then became "sort" of somber reporting that the storms destroyed peoples homes and killed so many. Felt like they were a bit disassociated by the catastrophes here. The wedding was way more important to them.

I as well am glad the wedding is over, just waiting for the news channels to get the drift.
 
I've been speculating about the relationship between Kate and William. I've read some interviews where females (possibly jealous) have stated that when in public Kate never left his side, the implication was that she guarded him. Also she has earned a masters degree in art history yet never headed towards a career. Took a partime accessory buyer job and part time in her parent's party business. Just speculating but I wonder about someone like Prince William who has been directed all his life, has to follow protocol, his reputation, anyways I think the odds of him falling prey to a woman with an agenda is fairly high. 8 or 9 years together with a break up in there. Why did he wait so long?
 
It's as if the whole thing would promoting, rioting and hard feelings for English middle class, and the impoverished that have been been hit hard do to the down turn and with white collar crime in the states Like a bit of a slap, while Rome burns. Its right up there with game shows of keeping the general public and preoccupied, as others have said, a distraction.

http://www.independentmail.com/news/2011/apr/23/british-natives-anderson-area-share-veiws-royal-we/

British natives in the Anderson area share views on the royal wedding
Loyalty to monarchy still reigns in British hearts


...............Die-hard royal fans can read about the musicians who will play at Westminster Abbey, the upcoming ceremony’s location, and every detail of the couple’s courtship has been covered in magazines and newspapers — both in America and in the United Kingdom.

So is there a reason for all the fuss?

Some English people are less than enthusiastic, Trevor Furlong said.

Stephanie Barczewski, a history professor at Clemson University who has specialized in British history, said there are those in Britian who are not pleased with the monarchy and how much such royal occasions cost. According to the London Telegraph, the cost of the wedding is expected to exceed 50 million British pounds, or $82 million.

“Since the late 19th century, there has been a persistent minority opinion in Britain that would like to see the monarchy abolished,” Barczewski said. “I think it will be important to see how the wedding is presented and how it plays out in context of the global economy — in Britain particularly, because they have presented some severe austerity measures.”

Those who argue for the abolishment of the monarchy, however, are not the dominant voice in Britain, Barczewski said, let alone in Parliament, where a measure for abolishment would need to gain steam.

“I think the monarchy is woven into the culture and fabric of British society,” Barczewski said. “They’ve done a good job of finding a role for themselves. As Britain has become a diverse population, there’s a need for things that can provide a focal point for national identity.”

Besides, there’s nothing like a royal wedding, with its nearly storybook tale of romance, to capture a wide audience, Barczewski said.

“I think people’s appetite for the glamour that the royals offer is still pretty strong,” she said. “I think many people will see it has a welcome respite from their economic circumstances.”

British government officials say that more than 5,500 street parties are being planned in honor of Prince William and his bride on Friday, according to the Associated Press. In England, many British workers will have the day off to watch the wedding because the Cabinet declared it a bank holiday.

Watching parties are planned across the United Kingdom, and in America.

In the Los Angeles suburbs, a pub owner plans to stay open all night for a champagne party. In Washington, one woman plans a British tea for 20 guests. In Mississippi, college students will watch as their one-time heartthrob marries his own university sweetheart.

“It’s hard for the common people to really wrap their mind around this bazillion dollar wedding that’s going to happen,” Martin said. “It’s like the desire we have here to see the top dog knocked off, but again, everybody loves the queen, there’s no two ways around it.”

Now i ask, what kind of message would the young couple send, by using that money all 82 million and spreading it around to the crushed the charitable organization's, that really serve the comunity or country?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/poverty_in_the_United_Kingdom
Poverty in the United Kingdom

How poverty in the United Kingdom is defined and measuredPoverty is defined by the Government as ‘household income below 60 percent of median income’. The median is the income earned by the household in the middle of the income distribution.[1]

In the year 2004/2005, the 60% threshold was worth £183 per week for a two adult household, £100 per week for a single adult, £268 per week for two adults living with two children, and £186 per week for a single adult living with two children. This sum of money is after income tax and national insurance have been deducted from earnings and after council tax, rent, mortgage and water charges have been paid. It is therefore what a household has available to spend on everything else it needs.[2]

Consider also:

"There are basically three current definitions of poverty in common usage: absolute poverty, relative poverty and social exclusion.

Absolute poverty is defined as the lack of sufficient resources with which to keep body and soul together.

Relative poverty defines income or resources in relation to the average. It is concerned with the absence of the material needs to participate fully in accepted daily life.

Social exclusion is a new term used by the Government. The Prime Minister described social exclusion as "…a shorthand label for what can happen when individuals or areas suffer from a combination of linked problems such as unemployment, poor skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime environments, bad health and family breakdown". - House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee
 

Attachments

  • royal-wedding-plate-2011[1].jpg
    royal-wedding-plate-2011[1].jpg
    33.9 KB · Views: 3
I didn't watch nor read nor do I care, but for others who couldn't care,
BUT... for those who want to keep up with current events...

Royal Wedding Recap: 60 Seconds, William and Kate Highlights

_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKe2maafFyc
:zzz: :zzz: :zzz:
 
Nathancat7 said:
The thing is Kate looks frightfully thin--almost anorexic in photos leading up to the wedding.

I think she looks amazing!!! Not anorexic!
 
EGVG said:
Nathancat7 said:
The thing is Kate looks frightfully thin--almost anorexic in photos leading up to the wedding.

I think she looks amazing!!! Not anorexic!

I agree with the anorexic take - she was already thin and I kept seeing articles a month or so ago about this diet she was on to lose weight for the wedding - kind of creepy.
 
Back
Top Bottom