Topical debate, moral dilemmas and quirky questions. Join fellow shareholders in civilised discussions of issues of interest
-
kevinchess1
- Posts: 23770
- Joined: Mon Jun 28 2010 11:02pm
- Location: Miles away from the sea
- Has thanked: 12599 times
- Been thanked: 17167 times
-
Contact:
Post
by kevinchess1 » Fri Feb 19 2021 10:26pm
A married couple are pregnant
I can't name them because I respect their privacy.
As they no doubt will be telling Oprah
But I'll leave you with this thought the child will be born in USA and be 8th? inline to the throne.
Which means. in 50=60 years, they could be both UK monarch and US president
Politically incorrect since 69
-
Chadwick
- Posts: 2436
- Joined: Mon Jul 05 2010 4:21pm
- Has thanked: 1235 times
- Been thanked: 2588 times
-
Contact:
Post
by Chadwick » Sun Feb 21 2021 3:46pm
kevinchess1 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 19 2021 10:26pm
A married couple are pregnant
I can't name them because I respect their privacy.
As they no doubt will be telling Oprah
But I'll leave you with this thought the child will be born in USA and be 8th? inline to the throne.
Which means. in 50=60 years, they could be both UK monarch and US president
And that, ladies and gentleman, is called the long game approach to winning the American War of Independence.
-
macliam
- Posts: 11235
- Joined: Thu Jul 18 2013 12:26pm
- Location: By the Deben, Suffolk
- Has thanked: 1630 times
- Been thanked: 9292 times
-
Contact:
Post
by macliam » Sun Feb 21 2021 11:14pm
kevinchess1 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 19 2021 10:26pm
A married couple are pregnant
I can't name them because I respect their privacy.
As they no doubt will be telling Oprah
But I'll leave you with this thought the child will be born in USA and be 8th? inline to the throne.
Which means. in 50=60 years, they could be both UK monarch and US president
Wouldn't they actually have to be related to the Queen first?
..... Asking for a friend
Just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get me
-
blythburgh
- Posts: 17758
- Joined: Tue Jun 29 2010 7:14pm
- Location: The Far East
- Has thanked: 35046 times
- Been thanked: 6110 times
-
Contact:
Post
by blythburgh » Mon Feb 22 2021 10:55am
Great Grand child of the Queen.
Keep smiling because the light at the end of someone's tunnel may be you, Ron Cheneler
-
macliam
- Posts: 11235
- Joined: Thu Jul 18 2013 12:26pm
- Location: By the Deben, Suffolk
- Has thanked: 1630 times
- Been thanked: 9292 times
-
Contact:
Post
by macliam » Mon Feb 22 2021 6:47pm
blythburgh wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22 2021 10:55am
Great Grand child of the Queen.
I didn't realise Jimmy Hewitt was related.......
Just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get me
-
blythburgh
- Posts: 17758
- Joined: Tue Jun 29 2010 7:14pm
- Location: The Far East
- Has thanked: 35046 times
- Been thanked: 6110 times
-
Contact:
Post
by blythburgh » Tue Feb 23 2021 9:41am
macliam wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22 2021 6:47pm
blythburgh wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22 2021 10:55am
Great Grand child of the Queen.
I didn't realise Jimmy Hewitt was related.......
Repeating the fake news?
If you are not careful you will end up at the same websites as the niece of 'im indoors. She believes the rubbish lies that are so easy to see through. But sister in law and her husband will not be having the flu or the covid vaccines.
Met up for a family lunch towards the end of last year. And she was coming out with statements like: "they are only trying to get the numbers up" when we were talking about the testing that was then increasing. And "they are trying to control us". Refused to expand on these statements, probably drummed into her by the daughter and doubt either of them have actually thought about what the statements mean let alone if there was any truth in what the website was saying
Keep smiling because the light at the end of someone's tunnel may be you, Ron Cheneler
-
kevinchess1
- Posts: 23770
- Joined: Mon Jun 28 2010 11:02pm
- Location: Miles away from the sea
- Has thanked: 12599 times
- Been thanked: 17167 times
-
Contact:
Post
by kevinchess1 » Tue Feb 23 2021 4:29pm
They have decided on names, Rich, for a boy and Sue for a girl
Politically incorrect since 69
-
macliam
- Posts: 11235
- Joined: Thu Jul 18 2013 12:26pm
- Location: By the Deben, Suffolk
- Has thanked: 1630 times
- Been thanked: 9292 times
-
Contact:
Post
by macliam » Tue Feb 23 2021 7:17pm
blythburgh wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23 2021 9:41am
macliam wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22 2021 6:47pm
blythburgh wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22 2021 10:55am
Great Grand child of the Queen.
I didn't realise Jimmy Hewitt was related.......
Repeating the fake news?
You choose to believe yours...... I'll wait for the paternity test!
"Saint Diana" is about as real as the tooth fairy....
Just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get me
-
blythburgh
- Posts: 17758
- Joined: Tue Jun 29 2010 7:14pm
- Location: The Far East
- Has thanked: 35046 times
- Been thanked: 6110 times
-
Contact:
Post
by blythburgh » Wed Feb 24 2021 10:49am
macliam wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23 2021 7:17pm
blythburgh wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23 2021 9:41am
macliam wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22 2021 6:47pm
I didn't realise Jimmy Hewitt was related.......
Repeating the fake news?
You choose to believe yours...... I'll wait for the paternity test!
"Saint Diana" is about as real as the tooth fairy....
She was more tomcat than saint but she did a lot of good especially turning Aids sufferers into normal sick humans and highlighting the huge and still far too neglected problem of landmines. But she did use the media to make her seem the saint and Charles/Camilla the devils.
And if I hear the words "Princess Diana" once more I will scream. She was never, ever Princess Diana. Princess was a mere courtesy title because she was married to a Prince. Anne, Eugenie etc are Princesses, Diana was only through marriage.
Same as Lady Colin Campbell has used the title she had when married to further her career as a celebrity. Long divorced but still using the husband's title.
I can see that women continue to use married name because they have children or other non monetary reasons. But it really gets up my nose when they play on the name of the former husband for monetary gain.
Keep smiling because the light at the end of someone's tunnel may be you, Ron Cheneler
-
Chadwick
- Posts: 2436
- Joined: Mon Jul 05 2010 4:21pm
- Has thanked: 1235 times
- Been thanked: 2588 times
-
Contact:
Post
by Chadwick » Wed Feb 24 2021 10:04pm
blythburgh wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24 2021 10:49am
And if I hear the words "Princess Diana" once more I will scream. She was never, ever Princess Diana. Princess was a mere courtesy title because she was married to a Prince. Anne, Eugenie etc are Princesses, Diana was only through marriage.
So yes, she gained the title of Princess of Wales. It's not a "mere courtesy title" - it was her title granted due to her marriage to Charles.
She was colloquially known as Princess Diana. If you're referring to her in a non-formal sense, everyone knows who you mean when you say Princess Diana. Not a title, just a shorthand.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests