Royal big mouth. - Page 3




 
--
Royal big mouth.
 
February 9th, 2008  
MontyB
 
 
Royal big mouth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Boy
What a weak and pathetic contibution to a serious discussion. I find it hard to imagine what you sought to achieve; it was like listening to a man heckling and hurling insults from the very back of a crowd. Great stuff.

You have a great penchant for putting words into other peoples' mouths.
Well it does seem to be the best option when the person you are arguing with doesn't seem to actually have a point of his own.

Quote:
NO-NO - I did not say that he was 'bad'; I'm not an infant.
NO-NO - I did not say that he was 'bad'; I'm not an infant.
Well lets see where I would get the idea that you don't like Andrew..

Comments taken from your posts within this thread:
- Royal big mouth.
- I wish to apologize for Britain inflicting this character on you.
- He is a main negative in the consideration of the survival of Royalty here.
-
I believe that folk here would be happy to let the commonwealth have him - if they think they can afford him and his entourage. He has no popularity here any longer.

But hey if I am somehow mistaken and you are secretly the leader of East Dunplopping chapter of the Andrew fan club I apologise.

Quote:
BTW - re. your comment on Edward, a question occurrs to me - are you a trained Royal Marine then?
What the hell does this have to do with anything, its no secret that Edward was simply too soft for the Royal Marines, I think this was confirmed when he left to join a theatre troop and make overly sterile documentaries about British castles and royal residences.

But anyway I like Spike have no interest in developing yet another of your trademarked pedantic and cyclic arguments so I have done what you should have done in the first place and presented a source for your "discussion" so that people can make their own minds up.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/...ica/andrew.php


And oddly enough it would seem that not all of Britain shares your views on his popularity.

There is some good news though I have noticed you only seem to be able to read about half a sentence, I thoroughly recommend opening both eyes when reading to see the whole story as I clearly posted "At least Andrew has the balls to stand up and say what he thinks." and you somehow you only managed to get as far as balls.
February 10th, 2008  
Del Boy
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Well it does seem to be the best option when the person you are arguing with doesn't seem to actually have a point of his own.
Hello - then what on earth are you arguing with.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MonyB
Well lets see where I would get the idea that you don't like Andrew..
Let me repeat myself - I did not say that Andrew was 'Bad' or that 'I did not like him'. I have a point of view regarding him, contradicting your first comment . I made my sourceclear from the beginning. You have come upon it some days later. Your link presents his own glossy view of himself, it seems to me, and would raise chuckles here. Early BBC or Sky news reports told of some furore & considerable hostility emanating from New York originally. It appears to have been buried here, the Sharia law row has provided cover.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
But hey if I am somehow mistaken and you are secretly the leader of East Dunplopping chapter of the Andrew fan club I apologise.
No -it appears that this title belongs to you. A Royalist I presume.




Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
What the hell does this have to do with anything, its no secret that Edward was simply too soft for the Royal Marines. I think this was confirmed when he left to join a theatre troop and make overly sterile documentaries about British castles and royal residences.

I presume that means that you have no Royal Marine training but presume yourself capable of judging someone who has made the attempt. Nice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty
B;399482
But anyway I like Spike have no interest in developing yet another of your trademarked pedantic and cyclic arguments .

Be my guests; I presume you found the joint shouting -down techniques cut no ice with me, as I do not submit to such tactics; might is not necessarily right, and neither is the numbers game. Personally, I would never need to drag up allies in support. I am content to stand alone on what I say.




Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
oddly enough it would seem that not all of Britain shares your views on his popularity.
Only most of them. BTW, if you read your link you will find that you have the wrong end of the stick. Randy Andy is not necessarily against the war in Iraq, only the post-war activities. But it is not his prerogative, whether that meets with your approval or not.


Your positives re. Andew , I take it, are that he has balls - don't we all; and that he can stand up- can't we all; and that he says what he thinks; how do you know. This occasion only took stupidity, because he said it in the wrong place at the wrong time to the wrong people in the name of our people. There are proper channels for such matters. Who knows what problems may arise from this.

As for your idiotic rant against his brothers Charles and Edward, you failed to respond to my question as to why you had accused me of supporting them. Did you have your eyes open when you presumed that, or were your eyes crossed at the time?

I am perfectly aware that you play to the crowd with your aggressive heckling intended to hijack discussion to suit your personal agendas.
You have attempted to stifle a great deal of material going in the wrong direction for your liking.

That leaves me completely unperturbed, play your cards any which way you care to.

Meanwhile, that will be sufficient for me on this thread - I have already spent far too long on Andy and his coat-tails. Have a nice day.
February 12th, 2008  
Englander2
 
Those who like taking a bash at the royalty may have good reasons. To see these aristocrats walking around in dress uniform with rows of medals which have not been earned, must grieve many a war veteran who has given up his/her health for the sake the country and does not even get a reasonable pension as thanks.
However, Britain is not alone when it comes to holding high the wrong people. George Bush, President of America and commander of the USA forces, has no real experience of active service. Nevertheless, he loves surrounding himself with high-ranking officers and is responsible for two unnecessary wars, in which thousands of troops and civilians have been crippled or killed.
The British people cannot vote for or against the royal family. Citizens of the USA do at least have a choice of who becomes President, even though this may be limited by financial influence to a few rather wealthy candidates. It is not for we Britons to tell our oversee friends who they should vote for, but perhaps they might consider, in the future, whether their leaders are chosen on the basis of capability rather than of the backing though undemocratic mercantile organisations.
By the way, after WW2, Churchill also said, "We have slaughtered the wrong Pig." I wonder if he is the right person to quote?
--
Royal big mouth.
February 12th, 2008  
A Can of Man
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Englander2
"We have slaughtered the wrong Pig." I wonder if he is the right person to quote?
What a great way to take it out of context.
February 12th, 2008  
Del Boy
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck
What a great way to take it out of context.

Yeah Redneck, I agree with that. And let me make it clear that I am a supporter of the Royal succession as an institution for Head of State, as long as the Ruler carries out the duties as prescribed in the service of the people. Our Queen has been the perfect example of this and holds my allegiance. It just so happens that the following generation are not really up to scratch and therefore I feel that they should be skipped and the succession should be inherited by William, when the time comes. The succession remains something to be earned and striven for, and when it no longer does that is when it should cease as a political institution.

Meanwhile, our Head of State is great and could not be bettered.
In that respect, I am certainly a Royalist at the present time.

BTW - it seems that Diana thought that in the event of The Queen having gone earlier, that the Crown should have been passed to William as a boy, with Andrew as Regent. She did not consider Charles fit for duty. Diana's heritage is even more royal than Charles' as far as Britain is concerned, descending from the Stuart Kings, and so William should present an interesting proposition as King, the most royal Brit for hundreds of years.
February 12th, 2008  
The Other Guy
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Englander2
Those who like taking a bash at the royalty may have good reasons. To see these aristocrats walking around in dress uniform with rows of medals which have not been earned, must grieve many a war veteran who has given up his/her health for the sake the country and does not even get a reasonable pension as thanks.
However, Britain is not alone when it comes to holding high the wrong people. George Bush, President of America and commander of the USA forces, has no real experience of active service. Nevertheless, he loves surrounding himself with high-ranking officers and is responsible for two unnecessary wars, in which thousands of troops and civilians have been crippled or killed.
The British people cannot vote for or against the royal family. Citizens of the USA do at least have a choice of who becomes President, even though this may be limited by financial influence to a few rather wealthy candidates. It is not for we Britons to tell our oversee friends who they should vote for, but perhaps they might consider, in the future, whether their leaders are chosen on the basis of capability rather than of the backing though undemocratic mercantile organisations.
By the way, after WW2, Churchill also said, "We have slaughtered the wrong Pig." I wonder if he is the right person to quote?
I see the point you are trying to make, and in some ways I agree. However, the last paragraph is completely out of context.

The British Monarchy has no real power and is essentially just a prop and a PR tool, correct? So why does anyone really care what they say any more than some other talking head on TV?
February 12th, 2008  
5.56X45mm
 
 
Ehh.... Royalty, never gave a damn about them. I don't care about a bunch of blue bloods. Born into power, blah, blah, blah, bah....

I live in America. A Nation in which the common is suppose to be able to run for president. Doesn't happen but dammit I will still hold on to that dream.

You guys can deal with him and his kind. I'll deal with mine. the USA and the UK are great friends and allies but somethings should not cross the pond.
February 13th, 2008  
Del Boy
 
Gone fishing - there's a notice on the door.
 


Similar Topics
The Royal Navy of Oman has recently ordered both Exocet and VL Mica Systems to equip
Barber ends career with another big day - and another loss
5 Big Ten teams accept bowl bids
Why did the RN get rid of big Carriers?
Can USA really win a big war?