How I feel about tomorrow...British!!!!
29 April 2011, 08:13 PM
#61
Scooby Regular
29 April 2011, 09:22 PM
#62
Good luck to the two of them 
I was a little confused this afternoon during a meeting with a couple of my guys in the US when they congratulated me... It's not as if I got married today.
I was a little confused this afternoon during a meeting with a couple of my guys in the US when they congratulated me... It's not as if I got married today.
29 April 2011, 09:55 PM
#63
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edinburgh (ish)
Posts: 8,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
30 April 2011, 12:00 AM
#65
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
His troll hairstyle and unpredicted grinning doesn't do justice to his Royalness either, but I reckon he passes really well as a hero for the young- cool-and-unkempt masses of Britain. I bet all high school goers think that sun shines through his butt. 
Good on you giving some credit to their late mum, mate. She would have been very proud to see her son wed today.
30 April 2011, 12:06 AM
#66
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pottering around ...
Posts: 3,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL not the most dignified walk on this earth for sure. His troll hairstyle and unpredicted grinning doesn't do justice to his Royalness either, but I reckon he passes really well as a hero for the young- cool-and-unkempt masses of Britain. I bet all high school goers think that sun shines through his butt.
Good on you giving some credit to their late mum, mate. She would have been very proud to see her son wed today.
His troll hairstyle and unpredicted grinning doesn't do justice to his Royalness either, but I reckon he passes really well as a hero for the young- cool-and-unkempt masses of Britain. I bet all high school goers think that sun shines through his butt. Good on you giving some credit to their late mum, mate. She would have been very proud to see her son wed today.
30 April 2011, 12:20 AM
#67
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
).
30 April 2011, 12:01 PM
#69
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strange how quick some are to criticise the bloke.
He seems perfectly decent lad to me, has served in Afghanistan and also qualified to fly an Apache which is a pretty demanding job.
He and his brother give a very good impression as royals and I imagine a lot of that is due to their mother's influence in their formative years.
Les
He seems perfectly decent lad to me, has served in Afghanistan and also qualified to fly an Apache which is a pretty demanding job.
He and his brother give a very good impression as royals and I imagine a lot of that is due to their mother's influence in their formative years.
Les
30 April 2011, 12:11 PM
#70
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strange how quick some are to criticise the bloke.
He seems perfectly decent lad to me, has served in Afghanistan and also qualified to fly an Apache which is a pretty demanding job.
He and his brother give a very good impression as royals and I imagine a lot of that is due to their mother's influence in their formative years.
Les
He seems perfectly decent lad to me, has served in Afghanistan and also qualified to fly an Apache which is a pretty demanding job.
He and his brother give a very good impression as royals and I imagine a lot of that is due to their mother's influence in their formative years.
Les
30 April 2011, 12:21 PM
#71
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strange how quick some are to criticise the bloke.
He seems perfectly decent lad to me, has served in Afghanistan and also qualified to fly an Apache which is a pretty demanding job.
He and his brother give a very good impression as royals and I imagine a lot of that is due to their mother's influence in their formative years.
Les
He seems perfectly decent lad to me, has served in Afghanistan and also qualified to fly an Apache which is a pretty demanding job.
He and his brother give a very good impression as royals and I imagine a lot of that is due to their mother's influence in their formative years.
Les
It's just a bit of a comparison to his brother, and certain expectation from him, for he is a Royal. Nothing sinister. May it be shallow, I confess.
I would say the same about the Duke of York's daughters. They are not as graceful as I would expect them to be, for being the princesses. Their hats were hideous yesterday. Now, they must be good kids with good hearts, but public evaluates the top layer from various angles. Inevitable for anyone who is in public eye. Again, shallow, I know.
30 April 2011, 12:40 PM
#72
As for tourism the only residence that makes it onto the top 20 UK attractions is Windsor castle in at number 17, Legoland beats that at number 7!! People would still come to the UK to visit former royal residencies, just look at Versailles.
People defend the royals for no real reason other than they "seem nice" or "do no harm" As for being an example to us all, what a load of tosh! Look at their failed marriages and affairs, hardly an example to set. Granted they are only human, but you can't live in a glass house and throw stones.
As for William and Harry. I feel sorry for them and it's obvious that their mother's care has rubbed off on them which is no bad thing. However, I doubt they'd so easily sail through their military careers if they were not royals. Can you imagine what would happen if any normal pilot borrowed a Chinook to go to a stag do and picked his brother up on the way?
The problem with the royals is they are like Marmite.
30 April 2011, 01:14 PM
#73
SN Fairy Godmother
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 35,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually that figure is greatly massaged. As shown by Republic campaign, it is reached by dividing £40m by 60m which is not just taxpayers, but every person living in the UK, children included. The real figure is likely to be much more, as is the actual cost of the royals. It's just we're not privy to the true cost.
As for tourism the only residence that makes it onto the top 20 UK attractions is Windsor castle in at number 17, Legoland beats that at number 7!! People would still come to the UK to visit former royal residencies, just look at Versailles.
People defend the royals for no real reason other than they "seem nice" or "do no harm" As for being an example to us all, what a load of tosh! Look at their failed marriages and affairs, hardly an example to set. Granted they are only human, but you can't live in a glass house and throw stones.
As for William and Harry. I feel sorry for them and it's obvious that their mother's care has rubbed off on them which is no bad thing. However, I doubt they'd so easily sail through their military careers if they were not royals. Can you imagine what would happen if any normal pilot borrowed a Chinook to go to a stag do and picked his brother up on the way?
The problem with the royals is they are like Marmite.
As for tourism the only residence that makes it onto the top 20 UK attractions is Windsor castle in at number 17, Legoland beats that at number 7!! People would still come to the UK to visit former royal residencies, just look at Versailles.
People defend the royals for no real reason other than they "seem nice" or "do no harm" As for being an example to us all, what a load of tosh! Look at their failed marriages and affairs, hardly an example to set. Granted they are only human, but you can't live in a glass house and throw stones.
As for William and Harry. I feel sorry for them and it's obvious that their mother's care has rubbed off on them which is no bad thing. However, I doubt they'd so easily sail through their military careers if they were not royals. Can you imagine what would happen if any normal pilot borrowed a Chinook to go to a stag do and picked his brother up on the way?
The problem with the royals is they are like Marmite.
The rest of them though. I do like, alot. And I am very proud of that fact.
I don't care how much they cost me, the money is worth it. I won't go into much preferring the Royals to benefit from my contribution to the Country, than other unworthy people.
30 April 2011, 01:25 PM
#74
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I defend the Royals because whenever they do something big, public in general gets patriotic. Apart from the Royal celebrations, it's only the football that gets British people to fly the flag, but unfortunately, patriotism with football can involve aggression. In other countries, they have republic days, independence days type of things to feel patriotic. Great Britain doesn't have such days to celebrate. Royal events in Britain make up for that gap. Therefore, Royals are important. Not because the Queen is cute (which she is 
), but at least they have this power to get the crowd all Union Jack-ed up. Politicians don't have this magic. Unlike football, Royal celebrations are the "win-win" situation for all! In my opinion, patriotism is necessary for any country. I love it when people get all British, and even embrace other non-British to celebrate their British being. Its brilliant! 
), but at least they have this power to get the crowd all Union Jack-ed up. Politicians don't have this magic. Unlike football, Royal celebrations are the "win-win" situation for all! In my opinion, patriotism is necessary for any country. I love it when people get all British, and even embrace other non-British to celebrate their British being. Its brilliant!
30 April 2011, 01:26 PM
#75
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
30 April 2011, 01:35 PM
#77
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most have it, DCI. One would only know if one thinks outside the box.
Boxed thinking is ignorance, not patriotism.
Otherwise "Prince Charles, big ears, Indian!
" won't be a mere idiotics.
30 April 2011, 03:27 PM
#78
I neither like nor dislike the Royals, however, no can deny that they form a significant part of our national identity from an international stand point. To do away with the Royal family and loose the hundreds of years of tradition and pageantry would be a kin to taking away the "Great" in Great Britain.
30 April 2011, 05:51 PM
#79
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edinburgh (ish)
Posts: 8,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I neither like nor dislike the Royals, however, no can deny that they form a significant part of our national identity from an international stand point. To do away with the Royal family and loose the hundreds of years of tradition and pageantry would be a kin to taking away the "Great" in Great Britain.
I realise that it stems from "The United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland", but why not just "The United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland"? Was it a reference to empire, or perhaps simply to the fact that this is a reference to all the counties on the island?
Last edited by andythejock01wrx; 30 April 2011 at 06:26 PM.
30 April 2011, 06:10 PM
#80
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually that figure is greatly massaged. As shown by Republic campaign, it is reached by dividing £40m by 60m which is not just taxpayers, but every person living in the UK, children included. The real figure is likely to be much more, as is the actual cost of the royals. It's just we're not privy to the true cost.
As for tourism the only residence that makes it onto the top 20 UK attractions is Windsor castle in at number 17, Legoland beats that at number 7!! People would still come to the UK to visit former royal residencies, just look at Versailles.
People defend the royals for no real reason other than they "seem nice" or "do no harm" As for being an example to us all, what a load of tosh! Look at their failed marriages and affairs, hardly an example to set. Granted they are only human, but you can't live in a glass house and throw stones.
As for William and Harry. I feel sorry for them and it's obvious that their mother's care has rubbed off on them which is no bad thing. However, I doubt they'd so easily sail through their military careers if they were not royals. Can you imagine what would happen if any normal pilot borrowed a Chinook to go to a stag do and picked his brother up on the way?
The problem with the royals is they are like Marmite.
As for tourism the only residence that makes it onto the top 20 UK attractions is Windsor castle in at number 17, Legoland beats that at number 7!! People would still come to the UK to visit former royal residencies, just look at Versailles.
People defend the royals for no real reason other than they "seem nice" or "do no harm" As for being an example to us all, what a load of tosh! Look at their failed marriages and affairs, hardly an example to set. Granted they are only human, but you can't live in a glass house and throw stones.
As for William and Harry. I feel sorry for them and it's obvious that their mother's care has rubbed off on them which is no bad thing. However, I doubt they'd so easily sail through their military careers if they were not royals. Can you imagine what would happen if any normal pilot borrowed a Chinook to go to a stag do and picked his brother up on the way?
The problem with the royals is they are like Marmite.
30 April 2011, 10:43 PM
#81
30 April 2011, 11:09 PM
#82
Do any of you Scoobynetters know how the name "Great Britian" came about?
I realise that it stems from "The United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland", but why not just "The United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland"? Was it a reference to empire, or perhaps simply to the fact that this is a reference to all the counties on the island?
I realise that it stems from "The United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland", but why not just "The United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland"? Was it a reference to empire, or perhaps simply to the fact that this is a reference to all the counties on the island?
01 May 2011, 09:10 AM
#84
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edinburgh (ish)
Posts: 8,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, I've heard about the holiday entitlements in the US, or lack thereof! Would love to work there for a while though, if perhaps not permanently cos I'd miss my friends and family. Australia is more likely I suppose since my gf is an Aussie.
How long are you over there SJ?
How long are you over there SJ?
01 May 2011, 11:40 AM
#85
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Les, I wouldn't take it as a harsh criticism.
It's just a bit of a comparison to his brother, and certain expectation from him, for he is a Royal. Nothing sinister. May it be shallow, I confess.
I would say the same about the Duke of York's daughters. They are not as graceful as I would expect them to be, for being the princesses. Their hats were hideous yesterday. Now, they must be good kids with good hearts, but public evaluates the top layer from various angles. Inevitable for anyone who is in public eye. Again, shallow, I know.
It's just a bit of a comparison to his brother, and certain expectation from him, for he is a Royal. Nothing sinister. May it be shallow, I confess.
I would say the same about the Duke of York's daughters. They are not as graceful as I would expect them to be, for being the princesses. Their hats were hideous yesterday. Now, they must be good kids with good hearts, but public evaluates the top layer from various angles. Inevitable for anyone who is in public eye. Again, shallow, I know.
Les
01 May 2011, 11:52 AM
#86
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually that figure is greatly massaged. As shown by Republic campaign, it is reached by dividing £40m by 60m which is not just taxpayers, but every person living in the UK, children included. The real figure is likely to be much more, as is the actual cost of the royals. It's just we're not privy to the true cost.
As for tourism the only residence that makes it onto the top 20 UK attractions is Windsor castle in at number 17, Legoland beats that at number 7!! People would still come to the UK to visit former royal residencies, just look at Versailles.
People defend the royals for no real reason other than they "seem nice" or "do no harm" As for being an example to us all, what a load of tosh! Look at their failed marriages and affairs, hardly an example to set. Granted they are only human, but you can't live in a glass house and throw stones.
As for William and Harry. I feel sorry for them and it's obvious that their mother's care has rubbed off on them which is no bad thing. However, I doubt they'd so easily sail through their military careers if they were not royals. Can you imagine what would happen if any normal pilot borrowed a Chinook to go to a stag do and picked his brother up on the way?
The problem with the royals is they are like Marmite.
As for tourism the only residence that makes it onto the top 20 UK attractions is Windsor castle in at number 17, Legoland beats that at number 7!! People would still come to the UK to visit former royal residencies, just look at Versailles.
People defend the royals for no real reason other than they "seem nice" or "do no harm" As for being an example to us all, what a load of tosh! Look at their failed marriages and affairs, hardly an example to set. Granted they are only human, but you can't live in a glass house and throw stones.
As for William and Harry. I feel sorry for them and it's obvious that their mother's care has rubbed off on them which is no bad thing. However, I doubt they'd so easily sail through their military careers if they were not royals. Can you imagine what would happen if any normal pilot borrowed a Chinook to go to a stag do and picked his brother up on the way?
The problem with the royals is they are like Marmite.
You would be surprised.
I once took Mrs Leslie up for a low level flight which she very much enjoyed and she was not too bad at controlling the 'plane for a first go!
The only thing she objected to was when I did a steep climbing "Break and Landing" which is the standard hooligan manner of reappearing at the airfield and which she was not expecting. I got a protracted earful about that for some time afterwards and the crew was having a good old ROFL at that!
In case you are worried about it Mr Pink, it was officially sanctioned and I am not even a Royal!
The figure for the cost of the royals was calculated for every adult in the UK.
Les
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sam Witwicky
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
17
13 November 2015 10:49 AM