Thread: Can the Queen disinvite Trump? Board: Purgatory / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=020074
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
My son and I got into a long discussion over the weekend about the petition to disinvite Trump to visit the Queen. He argued that since PM May already made the invite, the Queen has to honor it. However, my argument is that the Queen has the right to chose who she will or will not see, especially concerning the very unpopular Trump immigration ban.
Will the Queen be honor bound to the PM or will she reflect the will of her people?
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Will the Queen be honor bound to the PM or will she reflect the will of her people?
The last poll I saw on it suggested that "the will of her people" (TM) was to let him come. Don't confuse the views of liberals posting on SoF (with which I associate myself wholeheartedly) with the reality on the ground.
Anyway, if the PM says it's happening, it's happening. Much as we may wish it otherwise, it's unthinkable that the Queen would overrule the govt on this. Publicly anyway. If the govt wanted to come up with a face saving way of rowing back from it then that's where it would have to come from. HMQ is not about to stand precedent on its head by going against the govt.
Sorry about that.
Posted by DaleMaily (# 18725) on
:
My feeling is that she will have essentially have to meet him so long as her government wishes to receive him. I imagine that she could voice her objections to the government in private (just make sure Michael Gove isn't within hearing distance...) and the Palace probably could make the visit as short as possible, but given she has entertained world leaders who have violated human rights on a grand scale, which Trump is yet to do, I can't see her kicking up a fuss about seeing Trump.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
It would be a shame if she woke up with a 24-hour cold that morning...
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Yes, after wining and dining Ceausescu, I can't see the problem really. She will obey the govt.
Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on
:
I have heard that the proper protocol was not followed (May essentially announced the visit at a press conference without briefing or consulting the palace) and Her Maj is very much Not Amused.
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
Queens do as they are advised by their prime ministers. However, it's entirely conceivable that Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom will receive Mr Trump in London, but Her Majesty the Queen of Australia (either in person in Canberra or as represented by her Governor General) will decline to do so (should he have the nerve to travel to Oz).
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
Someone should knit HM a pussyhat. You could get a tiara over it.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
AIUI, the invite for a state visit has been offered and accepted. Therefore, withdrawing it (by the UK government, as noted the Queen doesn't have a say) would become a major diplomatic snub so is very unlikely to happen.
However, I'm not aware of any date having been suggested and as the various flunkies on both sides compare diaries to find a suitable date that could result in a fairly lengthy delay in the visit (though highly unlikely to be the 4 years needed until he's out of office, unfortunately). But, I can imagine Sir Humphrey suddenly noticing an early date being available should the President reverse some of his decisions, and not noticing it if he doesn't.
Finally, does anyone know whether the Queen has to host him on a state visit, or could that honour be passed to another senior royal? There could be some interesting conversations if it was passed to Prince Charles. Especially if a venue could be found with some wind turbines on the skyline.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
Possibly not, but the Speaker of House of Commons* just barred Trump from addressing Parliament in Westminster Hall for his "racism and sexism"
* not a gov position.
Extraordinary.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
According to this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38884604
Speaker Bercow says he is 'opposed' to Trump addressing Parliament (and I daresay a few MPS might well concur), so the question perhaps is how far does the Speaker's influence extend as regards 'barring'?
And it might not be too fine an idea to put Pussygrabber too close to a wind farm - wouldn't do his Magic Hair much good...
God help us, he might end up looking like Benny Hinn... ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
*sings*
'We shall overcomb, we shall overcomb....'
IJ
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
I always thought he bore more resemblance (coiffure-wise) to Boris Johnson.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
I was listening, he said decisions on Westminster Hall are made on consensus between the Speaker of the HoC, the Speaker of the Lords and some Sarjeant from the Parliamentary authorities.
Implication being if the Speaker objects, it doesn't happen.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
I always thought he bore more resemblance (coiffure-wise) to Boris Johnson.
If a tool has a similar purpose, it will have a similar appearance.
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on
:
Why would the Queen wish to snub a democratically elected leader from a Country on which the UK has depended heavily in the past and still does now.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Bercow certainly didn't mince his words about Trump, and mentioned racism and sexism, and attacks on the judiciary. I notice that the opposition benches applauded thunderously, while the govt side were silent mainly. I don't think they like Bercow.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
What I can smell is a load of hypocritical bullshit - from the editor of the Guardian up to the Speaker of the House of Commons.
Why should The President of The United States not receive a full state visit?
Did anyone protest the invitation to the various other leaders of the world who have actual blood n their hands?
No.
It's just fashionable at the moment to condemn Trump.
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on
:
Interesting to know what kind of conversation Trump would have with Phil the Greek.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Why should The President of The United States not receive a full state visit?
Because of the sexism and racism.
quote:
Did anyone protest the invitation to the various other leaders of the world who have actual blood n their hands?
Not all leaders get to speak in the Houses of Parliament.
As to the state visit - not all leaders get that either.
quote:
No.
It's just fashionable at the moment to condemn Trump.
Yeah. That might be because of his current activities as the leader of the most powerful country in the world.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I think the speaker does have the right to say who can and cannot speak in the house. He is able to bar an MP for bad behaviour.
The Queen, as has been said, couldn't disinvite Trump. She could explain to Theresa that he should be disinvited. Or that should Mrs May be so unreasonable as to do such a thing again, Her Majesty would be Very Unhappy. Which is the equivalent of tearing her off a very blue strip.
I think it is fair to say that Mrs May made a Very Bad Decision when she invited Trump. I suspect that she will not make such a Bad Decision again.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
I thought that there have been lots of protests over state visits, e.g. former POWs stood with their backs to Hirohito; there were protests over Putin and the Chinese leaders, and the Saudis. Somebody actually threw themselves under Putin's car. But demonstrations over Trump will probably be huge.
[ 06. February 2017, 17:43: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
The Queen, as has been said, couldn't disinvite Trump. She could explain to Theresa that he should be disinvited. Or that should Mrs May be so unreasonable as to do such a thing again, Her Majesty would be Very Unhappy. Which is the equivalent of tearing her off a very blue strip.
I'm not really sure that the Queen could even do that. Is it known that the Queen has ever done such a thing before? I know that there are periodic audiences with the Queen, but it seems highly unlikely that there would be no constitutional crisis if it was known that the Crown had "explained to the PM" what should or shouldn't be done.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Did anyone protest the invitation to the various other leaders of the world who have actual blood n their hands?
Personally, no. But, there were substantial protests over state visits by several other world leaders. This isn't new, though the advent of social media has probably resulted in more people having their say. Plus, we expect civilised behaviour from an American leader, so abuses of human rights by an American President is more shocking than (say) the Chinese President (not that that stopped protests over the visit by Bush).
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
One of my memories of a protest over a Chinese visit, is that the police tried to cover up pro-Tibet signs, and even threatened arrest of demonstrators.
As I mentioned, the Hirohito visit became famous, because not only did former POWs stand with their back to him, but wore red gloves (to symbolize blood), and whistled Colonel Bogey.
[ 06. February 2017, 18:16: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Why should The President of The United States not receive a full state visit?
Because of the sexism and racism.
If the Ceausescus, the Putins, the Chinese and the Emir of Kuwait all qualify, I query why President Trump shouldn't.
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Plus, we expect civilised behaviour from an American leader, so abuses of human rights by an American President is more shocking than (say) the Chinese President (not that that stopped protests over the visit by Bush).
Do we not risk having double-standards here?
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
The reason it is particularly important to diss the Tiny Fingered One at every turn is that this is the only way to communicate with him. Today he announced that all negative polls were rigged against him; he already does not read although he devours TV. His motivations revolve solely around rankings and prestige. The Queen can communicate with him in a way that we Americans can only manage with a million women in pussyhats screaming at his gate.
Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Bercow certainly didn't mince his words about Trump, and mentioned racism and sexism, and attacks on the judiciary. I notice that the opposition benches applauded thunderously, while the govt side were silent mainly. I don't think they like Bercow.
Widely thought of on those benches as an ego-centric, vain little man, I suspect (and I'd agree with them).
But I'm curious about the opposition to President Trump addressing Parliament in Westminster Hall. We learnt recently that he is bathophobic, which is apparently a fear of depths, including staircases. An address in Westminster Hall involves the speaker speaking from half-way up a flight of stairs. If you don't like the guy, that's presumably exactly where you'd want to put him for a couple of hours?
[ 06. February 2017, 19:00: Message edited by: Anglican't ]
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Why should The President of The United States not receive a full state visit?
Did anyone protest the invitation to the various other leaders of the world who have actual blood n their hands?
Could it possibly be time to stop welcoming vile people as if they were acceptable statesmen/women? Is precedent a sufficient reason for continuing this pretence? If it is, then how the blazes do I explain this to my grandchildren? I'll just tell them that I shared the mass delusion, and everything will be fine.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
HM will do as her Prime Minister advises her - she always has and will continue to do so. That has left her in unpleasant situations in the past - the Ceascescus being only one couple for whom doing her job must have been very difficult.
Nothing to sop her letting the PM know what she thinks - and as the PM has a weekly audience, I'd be very surprised if the topic had not been raised before the Washington visit. I've already given one certainty; another is that HM will not disclose what she said to the PM. Not at all sure about the reverse though.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
Rather than huge crowds of protestors, I'd love to see empty streets and sidewalks/pavements. I know it won't happen, but for him to be totally ignored would be wonderful. If he sees big crowds (even with signs and pussy hats), he'll just brag about how he was greeted by the biggest crowds ever.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
I think for Hirohito, along some sections of the crowd, there was dead silence, but also backs turned.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
One of my memories of a protest over a Chinese visit, is that the police tried to cover up pro-Tibet signs, and even threatened arrest of demonstrators.
As I mentioned, the Hirohito visit became famous, because not only did former POWs stand with their back to him, but wore red gloves (to symbolize blood), and whistled Colonel Bogey.
Hirohito had only one big ball?
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
The other was in the Albert Hall.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
It seems highly unlikely that there would be no constitutional crisis if it was known that the Crown had "explained to the PM" what should or shouldn't be done.
What's the worst that could happen? Would she be dishonored? At her age, and with her history behind her? I say go for it, Queenie, old gal.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
It seems highly unlikely that there would be no constitutional crisis if it was known that the Crown had "explained to the PM" what should or shouldn't be done.
What's the worst that could happen? Would she be dishonored? At her age, and with her history behind her? I say go for it, Queenie, old gal.
No, the PM would be dishonoured, and might be brought down. The monarchy would be under severe pressure also.
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
Why would a President of the United States not receive a state visit (to the UK)?
1) Because he was not elected by the majority of the people? The Electoral College, be damned.
2) Because his ban in effect would prohibit some of Her Majesties loyal subjects from entering the US if they have ever been a resident of the named Arab countries, especially Syria? Yes, that has been stayed by the courts for the time being.
3) Because he has thumbed his nose at NATO, of which the UK is a key partner. Remember the UK lost 454 personnel in support of the US in the Afghan War--for which I, as an American, thank you for your sacrifice.
4) Because the Orange One has direct connections to Fascist parties, which have their genesis from the old German National Socialist Party, which also caused so much suffering to your people in the not too distant past.
5)Because, as someone already pointing out, the invitation was not adequately coordinated with the palace.
But, now that the Speaker of your Parliment has said he is not willing to allow the Orange One to Speak before the houses, could this create a crisis of confidence for the PM?
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Hopefully, yes. She deserves it.
IJ
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
But, now that the Speaker of your Parliment has said he is not willing to allow the Orange One to Speak before the houses, could this create a crisis of confidence for the PM?
This must be stopped clock time, because John Bercow, smarmy git that he is, has said something I agree with.
(According to this list there have been 109 state visits to the UK during Her Majesty's reign. Two of those were by US Presidents (Bush in 2003 and Obama in 2011).
Here is a list of people who have addressed Parliament. The Americans are Reagan (1982), Clinton (1995), and Obama (2011).
Bush did not address parliament on his state visit, and Reagan and Clinton's addresses were not part of state visits.
Posted by Callan (# 525) on
:
Her Majesty would not dream of interfering in politics. If Mr Trump is invited on a State Visit, she will, of course, receive him.
She does, however, have ways of making her displeasure felt. When the King of Saudi Arabia visited she offered him a tour of the estate at Sandringham. When he arrived to receive said tour who should hop into the driving seat but Her Majesty.(According to the laws of Saudi Arabia, Allah has very strong views on women drivers). She proceeded to take him round the estate in a manner that suggested that if Britain turned republican she could get a gig as Bodie or Doyle in a remake of The Professionals. It is quite with the talents of Her Majesty to behave with studied courtesy whilst conveying the impression that he is about as welcome as something one inadvertently steps in on a pavement where the local canines have been less than continent.
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I think for Hirohito, along some sections of the crowd, there was dead silence, but also backs turned.
I recall the back turning thing by the PoW veterans who had experienced horrible abuse at the hands of Japanese soldiers during WW2.A legitimate form of protest from those who felt strongly enough to want to do that.
But as another post says above this current anti trump thing is fashionable, making it a wholly different matter. Despite everything thrown at the current US President he is still innocent until proven guilty, (if there is something to be found then the Americans are the ones who have to find it).
There are many many world leaders who fall well short of that bar, not to mention leading British Public figures and at least one deceased PM implicated in things best not mentioned here.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
The Queen, as has been said, couldn't disinvite Trump. She could explain to Theresa that he should be disinvited. Or that should Mrs May be so unreasonable as to do such a thing again, Her Majesty would be Very Unhappy. Which is the equivalent of tearing her off a very blue strip.
I'm not really sure that the Queen could even do that. Is it known that the Queen has ever done such a thing before? I know that there are periodic audiences with the Queen, but it seems highly unlikely that there would be no constitutional crisis if it was known that the Crown had "explained to the PM" what should or shouldn't be done.
Revealing what the Queen has said is considered vary bad etiquette. But there is some evidence that she has, on occasion, made her opinions known. I think, since Diana's death, she has taken a lot more interest in public perception.
But maybe not. She has to be seen to be a-political, so her opinions are only ever represented by others.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I think for Hirohito, along some sections of the crowd, there was dead silence, but also backs turned.
I recall the back turning thing by the PoW veterans who had experienced horrible abuse at the hands of Japanese soldiers during WW2.A legitimate form of protest from those who felt strongly enough to want to do that.
But as another post says above this current anti trump thing is fashionable, making it a wholly different matter. Despite everything thrown at the current US President he is still innocent until proven guilty, (if there is something to be found then the Americans are the ones who have to find it).
There are many many world leaders who fall well short of that bar, not to mention leading British Public figures and at least one deceased PM implicated in things best not mentioned here.
So you're saying that any potential protesters fail to meet your minimum offense level, thereby delegitimatizing their protest? Do you suppose they accept your authority to determine for them what constitutes a legitimate cause for protest?
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Her Majesty would not dream of interfering in politics. If Mr Trump is invited on a State Visit, she will, of course, receive him.
She does, however, have ways of making her displeasure felt. When the King of Saudi Arabia visited she offered him a tour of the estate at Sandringham. When he arrived to receive said tour who should hop into the driving seat but Her Majesty.(According to the laws of Saudi Arabia, Allah has very strong views on women drivers). She proceeded to take him round the estate in a manner that suggested that if Britain turned republican she could get a gig as Bodie or Doyle in a remake of The Professionals. It is quite with the talents of Her Majesty to behave with studied courtesy whilst conveying the impression that he is about as welcome as something one inadvertently steps in on a pavement where the local canines have been less than continent.
I love it! My opinion of Her Majesty has just gone up another ten points!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posted by Louise (# 30) on
:
The latest figures I saw on Trump from the Opinium/Observer poll, published Saturday 4th Feb was that only 36% want the visit to 'go ahead regardless', while 25% think that it should be delayed until his travel ban on Muslims from various countries is lifted/expires (which he shows no signs of removing/dropping, and has talked about expanding) plus 28% think that it should be cancelled outright. Together that's 53% who aren't keen on the visit. In addition:
quote:
In addition to the 64% who believe he represents a threat to international stability, the words most commonly associated by Britons with the divisive US president are dangerous (50%), unstable (39%), and bigot (35%). A further 56% believe he is untrustworthy.
Governments, in their naughtiness, roll out the red carpet all the time to dictators who they think might buy weapons systems and other toys. I don't personally approve of this and find it a bit sickening but the Saudis and the Ceaucescus didn't have a hope in hell of undermining NATO or undermining the rule of law in the USA, and were in no position to fatally compromise the Five Eyes with regard to Russia (even if the Ceaucescus might have liked to, they weren't in a position to undermine effectively from within).
Embracing Trump is embracing someone genuinely dangerous to us, to our way of life and to our allies who still share our values. He's not just odious. He's a genuine danger - given to provoking the Chinese, looking the other way to Russian aggression in Ukraine (and potentially to expansionism in the Baltic), compromised in his relations with the FSB, and though you wouldn't think anyone was capable of making things worse in Syria and Iraq, he's having a good go at it, by alienating anti-Isis allies on the ground with the visa ban and talking about taking their oil. He's set off a round of sabre-waving with Iran and already launched a total fuck-up of a military operation in Yemen which bodes ill for the future. He's also dangerously unreliable, ignorant and incompetent in just about every respect. He can't even call a friendly fellow right-wing refugee-hating Anglosphere ally like Australia's Malcolm Turnbull without causing havoc.
He has comprehensively shat on the carpet of Post World War 2 stability and is transforming his own country into what The Economist Intelligence Unit(EIU) have described as 'a flawed democracy'. If you think they're raving lefties, I don't know what to say to you.
The Queen will do what she's asked by the Prime Minister as that's what she does, but people who embrace Trump and drive ahead this visit are embracing a large unflushable turd and all the perfumes of Araby won't sweeten that.
[ 06. February 2017, 23:46: Message edited by: Louise ]
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
These are indeed strange times. Sometimes we just have to break with tradition.
The Orange One is such a narcissist that any slight by HM would be devastating to him. But I am sure she will keep the visit to the minimum amount possible.
To the point of the Queens driving ability, if I recall she drove transports during WWII.
Posted by Huia (# 3473) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Louise:
He can't even call a friendly fellow right-wing refugee-hating Anglosphere ally like Australia's Malcolm Turnbull without causing havoc.
On the other hand New Zealand's current Prime Minister found him "warm and thoughtful"
Huia
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
(From across the Pond.)
Alan--
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Finally, does anyone know whether the Queen has to host him on a state visit, or could that honour be passed to another senior royal? There could be some interesting conversations if it was passed to Prince Charles. Especially if a venue could be found with some wind turbines on the skyline.
I've been wondering that, too. (Other than the windmills! ) If T is at all capable of taking in a small amount of info about, say, climate change, Pr. Charles might be just the person. I think he's written a book on climate change? If he could keep it very simple, the way he might explain it to an inattentive five year old, maybe at least "oh, something icky is going on" might get through to T.
Not that I would wish T on Pr. C!
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
As Trump is a head of state, protocol says that he is invited by HM as head of state of the UK. On the other hand, Angela Merkel, for example, is a head of government and thus Theresa May is the proper person to issue the invitation.
Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on
:
According to the Sunday Times (behind a paywall, so no link) Trump has said that he does not want to meet Prince Charles, but would prefer to meet Prince William.
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
Has anyone considered the diplomatic consequences if Trump *does* arrive, the Queen is too ill to receive him, and he spends the whole time sulking in the American Embassy and refusing to come out because he doesn't want to meet Charles?
If HM *is* well enough to receive him, I'd back her against Trump any day. I am sure she is quite capable of making her feelings known...
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
According to the Sunday Times (behind a paywall, so no link) Trump has said that he does not want to meet Prince Charles, but would prefer to meet Prince William.
Picky blighter, isn't he? Does he have the right to lay down the rules to his hosts?
In ancient times, this would be breach of the unbreachable laws of hospitality, wouldn't it? And subject to nemesis in some way.
What is infuriating me at the moment is the way the Tories keep blethering on about him being legitimately elected. Now one can interpret legitimately as meaning according to law, which is true, but they sometimes omit that adjective, and imply that he is the chosen one of the US people in some magic way which makes him proper. (They make the same sort of argument for themselves, of course.)
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
According to the Sunday Times (behind a paywall, so no link) Trump has said that he does not want to meet Prince Charles, but would prefer to meet Prince William.
Picky blighter, isn't he? Does he have the right to lay down the rules to his hosts?
About as much right as he has to tell other countries who their ambassadors should be. Which hasn't stopped him.
quote:
What is infuriating me at the moment is the way the Tories keep blethering on about him being legitimately elected. Now one can interpret legitimately as meaning according to law, which is true, but they sometimes omit that adjective, and imply that he is the chosen one of the US people in some magic way which makes him proper. (They make the same sort of argument for themselves, of course.)
A rather uncommon consistency in our government.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
If T does meet with the queen, I hope she has very visible guards close by at all times, plus the corgis. I don't think she's type, which seems to be anyone younger than he is. But better safe than sorry. And if he meets with William, Katherine should be nowhere near. Seriously.
Posted by Amika (# 15785) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Louise:
The Queen will do what she's asked by the Prime Minister as that's what she does, but people who embrace Trump and drive ahead this visit are embracing a large unflushable turd and all the perfumes of Araby won't sweeten that.
Agree with everything you wrote there.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
According to the Sunday Times (behind a paywall, so no link) Trump has said that he does not want to meet Prince Charles, but would prefer to meet Prince William.
I think he should be introduced to Sir Mo Farah.
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
And the Mayor of London, of course.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
What is infuriating me at the moment is the way the Tories keep blethering on about him being legitimately elected. Now one can interpret legitimately as meaning according to law, which is true....
One can not only interpret it that way, that is the primary definition of "legitimately." "Legitimately elected according to law" would be redundant.
I'm horrified that Trump won the election, but win it he did. The fact that he lost the popular vote is totally irrelevant, except perhaps to the question of any mandate he might have. Under the rules of the game, he didn't have to win the popular vote to be elected.
Claims that The Dear Tweeter was not legitimately elected, like the protests of "he's not my president" are, in my opinion, not helpful at all in dealing with the disturbing reality that he is president.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Of course HM can withdraw the invitation to Mr Trump: it would be unprecedented but it could be done; however, she won't since to withdraw the invitation would be seen - by HM at least - as being unspeakably rude.
It is not for any visiting Head of State to dictate to The Queen who they should or should not meet, and nor does the government have any say over which memebers of the royal family are included in things like state banquets, formal welcomes, etc.
The Prince of Wales will be heavily involved because he will become head of state, and because at 91 and 96 The Queen and Prince Philip are starting to handover some of the more onerous bits of things like this.
So Mr Trump wishes to meet the Duke of Cambridge? I doubt if Prince William is so anxious, and if I were him I'd do my best to make sure The Donald didn't get within 20 miles of my wife.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
There is an excellent royal precedent, set by the first Elizabeth. If I were the royals I would not hesitate to 'fall crafty sick', even at the last moment. The Queen, at her age, is especially suited to this.
And the ladies are always carrying handbags. Get a sturdy leather one, as big as possible. Hold it front and center, never moving it, and your pussy is shielded from tiny-finger groping.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Though one of the cartoons I've seen suggests that letting him get behind one might be risky, too.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Linky, pretty please?
IJ
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Sorry, it's completely escaped me where I saw it. But it had Putin grabbing DT between the legs as DT was grabbing a woman in the same way. Not sure if it was in Private Eye which I perused in the supermarket. I've checked out the #ActLikeAPresident tweets (which I found from the #dress like a woman lot) - not there. And run a search on Putin Trump cartoons with no luck.
Sorry
It might have been shown in one of the "Every Second Counts" videos.
[ 07. February 2017, 16:59: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Not to worry.
Private Eye sounds about right, though!
IJ
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
TBH, I think MH is quite capable of looking after herself, and may well find that her heir is the best person to meet with Trump. Just for the hell of it.
Which would be extremely funny.
Yes, I wouldn't let any of the royal ladies near him, given a choice. If he tried it on with anyone, he would be at risk of causing a diplomatic incident. But Trump will be in trouble anyway, as it won't all be about him. I suspect he will hate his visit here.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
No, he'll adore it. He'll insist on many pictures of himself at that palace, etc. Tip: deny him the images. No cameras.
Posted by Carex (# 9643) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
According to the Sunday Times (behind a paywall, so no link) Trump has said that he does not want to meet Prince Charles, but would prefer to meet Prince William.
Picky blighter, isn't he?...
Of course he doesn't want to meet Charles - he doesn't have a hot wife.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Ouch!
IJ
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Carex:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
According to the Sunday Times (behind a paywall, so no link) Trump has said that he does not want to meet Prince Charles, but would prefer to meet Prince William.
Picky blighter, isn't he?...
Of course he doesn't want to meet Charles - he doesn't have a hot wife.
I see this differently. Given his Twitter fascination with Robert Pattinson, I think Trump has mistaken William for Harry.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
It is not for any visiting Head of State to dictate to The Queen who they should or should not meet, and nor does the government have any say over which memebers of the royal family are included in things like state banquets, formal welcomes, etc.
Of course a visitor can't dictate anything to anther head of state. But one of Trump's private secretaries will discuss with one of HM's what the great man would like to see, meet, do etc during the stay. It won't be dictated, but discussed. Perhaps Prince William will have other responsibilities at the time?
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
I would hope Prince William will be able to get an assignment to rescue refugees somewhere off the Turkish coast during the Trump visit, myself.
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
She can but she may not
Posted by Stephen (# 40) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
I would hope Prince William will be able to get an assignment to rescue refugees somewhere off the Turkish coast during the Trump visit, myself.
Or even better take the Duck with him to show him some of the problems at first hand. He should feel priviliged - after all it's not everyone who can hitch a lift from RAF pilot ( r'td)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
For an activity, surely Mr Trump would be impressed by the privilege of being invited to Balmoral, HM's private estate, where he would have the honour of participating in traditional Scottish country pastimes, including Prince Philip's famed barbecues, the legendary indoor heating of Scottish castles, being piped awake at dawn, and the rare delight of being given a drive by Her Majesty, as she did so famously with then Crown Prince Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud.
Posted by Carex (# 9643) on
:
I'm sure they could arrange an early morning hunt for the wild haggis for him while he is there, too.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
No woman wants to be alone in a car with the PGinChief. Even being in your 90s and not having big boobs might not protect you.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Carex:
I'm sure they could arrange an early morning hunt for the wild haggis for him while he is there, too.
They would need to be careful, in case someone mistook his hair for a wild haggis.
Or, maybe being careful isn't the plan ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
Rumour here has it that he has asked for a visit to Balmoral, and to play a round of golf on the private course there with H.M. watching. Oh, and breakfast at Blenheim, like Winston Churchill, and a tour of the Cabinet War Rooms conducted personally by the Foreign Secretary.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
posted by Carex quote:
Of course he doesn't want to meet Charles - he doesn't have a hot wife.
Not true. While the Duchess of Cornwall may not be conventionally handsome, she has more sex-appeal in her little finger than the fragrant Duchess of Cambridge. Take it from me, flicky-hair does not a temptress make.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
posted by Carex quote:
Of course he doesn't want to meet Charles - he doesn't have a hot wife.
Not true. While the Duchess of Cornwall may not be conventionally handsome, she has more sex-appeal in her little finger than the fragrant Duchess of Cambridge. Take it from me, flicky-hair does not a temptress make.
Takes all sorts I suppose.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
Anyone who uses the term "sex-appeal" to refer to that group of in-bred, self-righteous, sychophantic, entitled half-wits seriously needs to go and talk to themselves in the mirror.
If we ignored the Windsor family for more than a few seconds they might go away. Or spontaneously combust or something.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
mr cheesy
the Duchess of Cornwall is not a Windsor, she is only married to one.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
A whimsical thought re Trumpannon at Balmoral - Himself (in a kilt, displaying Orange Legs), partnering the Duchess of Cornwall in a Military Two-Step, Scottish-style:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67eAIIcdCP0&nohtml5=False
I'll get ma bonnet...and ma heid...
IJ
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
L'organist: quote:
the Duchess of Cornwall is not a Windsor, she is only married to one.
Most people would agree that that makes her part of the family.
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
Rumour here has it that he has asked for a visit to Balmoral, and to play a round of golf on the private course there with H.M. watching. Oh, and breakfast at Blenheim, like Winston Churchill, and a tour of the Cabinet War Rooms conducted personally by the Foreign Secretary.
If he is such a fan of Churchill, he will likely then be pleased to take the opportunity to visit the London Central Mosque, built on the initiative of Churchill and the Cultural Centre built there was opened by His Late Majesty George VI.
Posted by Rosalind (# 317) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Rather than huge crowds of protestors, I'd love to see empty streets and sidewalks/pavements. I know it won't happen, but for him to be totally ignored would be wonderful. If he sees big crowds (even with signs and pussy hats), he'll just brag about how he was greeted by the biggest crowds ever.
Best schedule it for August Bank Holiday when everyone will be either at Notting Hill, or the seaside
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
I think that this says it all ... (from "Private Eye").
[ 18. February 2017, 11:35: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
When th late Emperor Hirohito of Japan made a state visit in 1971 which was greatly resented by those who had fought in the Far East, especially those who had been prisoners of the Japanese.
Informally, and also through the Burma Star Association and organisations for ex-POWs, they managed it so that The Mall was lined by ex-servicemen who, when the state landau bearing HM and Hirohito passed, turned their backs. They were given tacit (and very unofficial) support by the police and military on parade that day, many of whom made it very clear they weren't happy.
One of my own grandfathers served in the Far East and insisted on making the long trek from rural mid-Wales to London specially...
Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on
:
I hear rumours that Trump is going to be invited to Balmoral, to "avoid protesters."
The North East of Scotland's dislike of Trump pre-dates the Presidential election. The disaster that is the Menie golf course spawned the filmYou've Been Trumped
Mexican flags are frequently seen flying near the course.
Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, awarded Trump a honorary degree before the Menie Golf Course became the PR disaster that it now is. They stripped him of the honorary degree in 2015.
The area has a track record of anti-Trump sentiment. The suggestion that Trump comes here instead of London is either naive or brilliant. Protesters get to have a field day with Trump, but Westminster keeps its hands clean.
As someone posted on Facebook - it's a win / win. We prove that Scotland isn't anti-English by arranging hospitality for visiting English protestors and we get to jeer at Trump.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
I wonder if he's ever tried haggis? I gather it's an acquired taste. This might be a good time to honor him with the local cuisine. Of course, his mom was Scottish, so maybe he has a built-in taste for it.
Or perhaps take him on a hunt for a wild haggis.
Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on
:
Haggis is delicious. The problem isn't the taste, it's that some people are squeamish about the ingredients. We eat it at home at least once a month over winter; it's an easy meal as it just needs to be boiled and served with potatoes and turnip (swede).
It's also a good ingredient which goes well with other foods; chicken robroys are chicken breasts stuffed with haggis, haggis and mozzarella paninis are tasty, and haggis in filo pastry parcels is a popular restaurant starter.
I'm fairly sure someone will give Trump haggis if he visits us.
![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Haggis is indeed very tasty, but proved to be too much for a Norwegian family staying in the same hotel as me. Haggis formed part of 'The Big Scottish Breakfast', but the Norsemen quailed before it when they found out what it was.
I was happy to assist, and had a (mostly) haggis breakfast....
In Pussygrabber's case, I could suggest suitable stuffings/accompaniments e.g. Semtex, but will refrain, as TIACW.
IJ
Posted by bib (# 13074) on
:
I think he should be exposed to all the corgis while being encouraged to wear a kilt. The more we can discomfit this man the more I will be content.
Posted by Crśsos (# 238) on
:
For those who are squeamish, there's always vegetarian haggis in a can.
I'm always surprised at the ingenuity of product development folks, the kind of people who will come up with something the world didn't know it needed.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Crśsos:
there's always vegetarian haggis in a can.
That's an abomination on at least two counts.
The only plus point is that when thrown not even the Hair™ will prevent it knocking some sense into his head.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
From the manufacturer's website:
'Many people ask us how we produce a Vegetarian Haggis and we’re happy to let them in on a little secret – we only feed them on grass and heather!'
IJ
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
I'm English, well except for Ľ Scottish, and I love haggis.
Also, by the way, you can microwave it quickly and easily. And if you're not Scottish, you don't have to have neaps with it, which I'll eat but don't eat by choice.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
HM must do as she is advised, but she is also entitled to give advice. As Balmoral is her private property (and she paid relevant death duties on it and Sandringham when her father died) she could well give advice to Ms May that at her age, she'd rather not have Trump as her guest, not even a flying visit. She might just stretch to asking him to afternoon tea were he to stay at his local golf course, but she's not going to have him, not with all his security staff running around the place.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
Haggis is delicious.
Yes indeed. Well, except for that canned abomination, but no true haggis...
quote:
The problem isn't the taste, it's that some people are squeamish about the ingredients.
Usually people who will eat a sausage without batting an eyelid, or asking which bits of the animal were involved.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
From the manufacturer's website:
'Many people ask us how we produce a Vegetarian Haggis and we’re happy to let them in on a little secret – we only feed them on grass and heather!'
Veggie haggis doesn't have to come in a tin, although clearly it can't come in sheep's stomach ...
Our local sausage shop has recently gone over from MacSween's haggis to Ramsay's of Carluke, which is excellent.
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
Asking donald fart to eat haggis would be like asking a pig to eat pork. Too many similarities.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
So Her Majesty won't be serving him haggis, then. What would be some good choices for the menu?
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
So Her Majesty won't be serving him haggis, then. What would be some good choices for the menu?
Would lampreys be a suitable dish? Nothing short of a surfeit naturally.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
posted by Carex quote:
Of course he doesn't want to meet Charles - he doesn't have a hot wife.
Not true. While the Duchess of Cornwall may not be conventionally handsome, she has more sex-appeal in her little finger than the fragrant Duchess of Cambridge. Take it from me, flicky-hair does not a temptress make.
Bloody hell, L'Organist ... do we have to put up with your pervy letching?
I need some brain-suds to wash away the images you've conjured up.
I remember a work colleague asking how it was that the Prince of Wales could end up with someone who 'had a face like Iggy Pop's arse.'
To which another colleague responded, 'It could have been worse, she could have had a face like Iggy Pop's face ...'
![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Well, actually ...
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
The Times recently had a brief report to the effect that the golf course at Balmoral is to be opened to the public. So there would be no way of keeping TD away, but anyong willing to pay the green fee would be able to go and watch him play.
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on
:
For any puzzled non UK Shipmates, the medieval King Henry 1 died of 'a surfeit of lampreys'.
Posted by Jack the Lass (# 3415) on
:
For the record, vegetarian haggis is delicious. I know it's not the real thing, and would never claim it was, but for those of us who don't eat meat it means we can still participate in the national dish. Plus we always have it for Christmas dinner in place of turkey - it goes perfectly with roast veg.
Re Trump coming to Scotland, it will just be yet another opportunity for some spectacular insults. If he'd gone to London I could imagine the protests consisting of turned backs (which I happen to think would be very effective against his fragile ego). Instead he'll just have to face some more creative wordplay.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Prairie Pudding - an empty plate, i.e. miles and miles and miles of b*gg*r all.
Alternatively, tortillas of for that matter, anything Mexican. Or Bombe Surprise with a real bomb in it.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
I had envisioned kilted Scotsmen turning and bending over with lifted hem, but I have a vivid imagination.
Posted by Ethne Alba (# 5804) on
:
Oh hells teeth ,can't we just totally ignore him?
No crowds protesting. Nothing at all.
Anything else, would ....absolutely.... be misinterpreted By Him.
And any travelling media.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
He could be met by empty streets, with no one but his own staff there. Nothing to see but some wind turbines turning gracefully on the horizon.
But, he'd declare that he was warmly welcomed by crowds of people.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
And when you showed photos or footage of the empty streets he would insist that the images had been doctored, or swapped or something. We here in the US have been there and done this. Subtle is utterly lost upon the Groper of Pussies. Please, UKians, come through with something brassy and bold. That he cannot ignore or spin. Or blame on Barack Obama. Be creative.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
'UKians'? What's wrong with 'British'?
There are Canadians, not Canadish, Californians but not Californish ...
Bold and brassy? Well, we've got Barbara Windsor ...
But he'd probably like her. Ooh, Matron ...
I suppose a mass collective fart might be appropriate given that Trump is UK primary school slang for flatulence ...
It'd be nice to see something creative, placards and banners are sooooo 20th century ...
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
Are there no =bagpipes=? C'mon, guys!
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
'UKians'? What's wrong with 'British'?
*snip*
Northern Ireland is the problematic factor.
British refers to people or things which are from (Great) Britain. UKian is the unfortunate but apt descriptor for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Posted by Jack the Lass (# 3415) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Are there no =bagpipes=? C'mon, guys!
He's made a big thing of being piped in when his golf course opened (google "bagpipes donald trump" and there are the images) and I think when he's got out of the plane too - that wouldn't ordinarily be offensive to him, regardless of what many people think of the dulcet tones of Scotland's instrument of war. However, I'm guessing this guy might not be exactly to his taste.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I suppose a mass collective fart might be appropriate given that Trump is UK primary school slang for flatulence ...
How about everyone in the crowd wearing these?
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
He should be driven from the airport in a bus. I am sure he knows Margaret Thatcher's remark that, “A man who, beyond the age of 26, finds himself on a bus can count himself as a failure.” But he probably doesn't know what a bus is.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
Is there local bus service from the airport to Balmoral? Preferably the type of bus where people get on with their goats and chickens (probably more common in other parts of the world than in Scotland). If he's lucky he might get a seat rather than having to stand in the aisle.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Re bagpipes:
You could really surprise him with Japanese bagpipers. AIUI, that got started when a Japanese man heard bagpipes, and wept, because they reminded him of Japanese warrior tradition.
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
Trump trashes NATO
Acts as a child at the G7
Picks a fight with Germany
Snubs the Paris Accords
Gets into a one-sided tweet storm with the Mayor of London. (who is now calling for the withdrawal of the invite)
Why would anyone want him to visit your great nation?
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on
:
I wish he wouldn't visit ours, for say, four years.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
Why don't they simply change the locks on the White House doors the next time he leaves to go anywhere?
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Well, he'd just carry on 'governing by Twitter' from Mar-a-Lago, or wherever he happens to be playing golf at the time.
I suppose we'll have to host the Orange Lord at some point, but not yet, please ...
IJ
Posted by Ohher (# 18607) on
:
45 should visit Siberia. He should tour gulags, and wax Twitteretic in praise of the bigly security facilities there. He should enter into negotiations with the Kremlin over converting "political prisoner centers" into casino tourist traps and, in the dear old Yiddish curse, he should prosper and grow rich and buy a hotel with a thousand rooms and be found dead in every one of them.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Ohher--
Shhhh! He'll want to build his own greatest, bigliest gulags. Don't give him ideas!!
![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Ohher, thank you for that wonderful addition to the list of Yiddish curses upon The Trumpimple!
(May he burst, soonish, and very bigly.)
IJ
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Why don't they simply change the locks on the White House doors the next time he leaves to go anywhere?
I'd be willing to withdraw all my moral and ethical concerns with the travel ban if we could guarantee it would permanently bar ANYONE who'd visited a Muslim nation with a history of supporting terrorism in the prior 60 days.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
What's good for the goose . . . .
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
Britain's part of NATO-- and they tell me "an attack on one is an attack on all". Can't you detain him as a foreign operative who is in the process of attempting a coup on a NATO ally?
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Cliffdweller--
Good. And find some reason for another country to drag him off to the criminal court in the Hague. Let him think it's an honor. (Of course, the US isn't a signatory to that court, so might not be possible.)
And if we could involve the fictional UN Center for Law and Enforcement, a la "The Man From UNCLE", then Ilya Kuryakin and Napoleon Solo could get into the game. Particularly appropriate, since they were into Cold War hijinx.
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Hmmm...I wonder if the pope could persuade T that he really could use a long retreat...
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
I should think that, after meeting with Trumpimple, the Pope could do with a long retreat...
IJ
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I should think that, after meeting with Trumpimple, the Pope could do with a long retreat...
IJ
Or a long, long "silkwood" shower...
Yeah, retreats don't seem to be Donald's thing. Much better would be to invent some pseudo-religious Catholic honorific he needs to fly to Rome to receive-- "The Bigly Popist Medal of Bigliness." No need to make it sound real or use Latin-- the guy that has to ask if Presbyterians and evangelicals are "both Christians?" isn't likely to have a lot of detailed info on papal honors. Once he arrives at the ceremony a brief instruction in the ancient Christian tradition of humility will elucidate why this honor may not be all he expects.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Could I put a question to USAnian Shipmates.
You've probably picked up that he's bigly unpopular over here.
However, as he's your President, even though many of you wish he wasn't, if the UK were to withdraw his invitation, would those of you who don't like him be sympathetic, or would your identification with your country cause you to feel this as an emotional affront to your country?
[ 08. June 2017, 16:37: Message edited by: Enoch ]
Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on
:
Personally I would be happy to see his invitation withdrawn. I don't see him in any way as representing my country, so an insult to him is not an insult to us.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
I think most of us (minus the diehard T supporters) agree he has it coming to him.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Could I put a question to USAnian Shipmates.
You've probably picked up that he's bigly unpopular over here.
However, as he's your President, even though many of you wish he wasn't, if the UK were to withdraw his invitation, would those of you who don't like him be sympathetic, or would your identification with your country cause you to feel this as an emotional affront to your country?
I would love England even more! I do identify with my country, but no way, no how do I identify with Trump. No sympathy from me.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Enoch--
If his particular invitation is withdrawn, it needs to be made crystal clear that it's about *him*, not about the US. That would need to be said in words, not just implied.
I would probably have a knee-jerk response of being a little offended, but I'd deal with it. The big problem would be his supporters, and anyone else who took it as a slap in the face of the US, betrayal, rejection of "the special relationship", etc. The reaction would make the whole "not French fries, but *Freedom* fries" mess look like just flicking off a piece of lint.
Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Could I put a question to USAnian Shipmates.
You've probably picked up that he's bigly unpopular over here.
However, as he's your President, even though many of you wish he wasn't, if the UK were to withdraw his invitation, would those of you who don't like him be sympathetic, or would your identification with your country cause you to feel this as an emotional affront to your country?
Part of me would cheer if he was disinvited, seeing how I view him as a quasi-fascist and a threat to democracy everywhere, but I doubt it would be helpful. It would only give more fuel to his supporters' fire and it would encourage the Putins and Erdogans of the world to disinvite any heads of state/government whose actions they disapproved of. Also, despite my just having called Trump a quasi-fascist, I do not think he is quite at the Hitler level of citizens-have-no-loyalty-to-him and all-nations-must-deny-him-any-recognition. So he does deserve to be treated with the respect due to a Head of State. Sadly, the exigencies of salvaging what hope is left for peace in the world also means that honoring the Special Relationship is also important, even if Trump has been bad mouthing allies left and right and not honoring our commitments to NATO.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
I don't suppose Prince Charles could introduce T to a nice, big compost heap?
"Oh, goodness, did you fall in? Well, since you're in there, would you mind awfully turning the compost over? And when you're done and have cleaned up, I believe Camilla will have some warm scones and tea waiting. Darjeeling?"
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
You do not want to invite him. You do not want to see him. Preserve your own health, sanity, and morality. Do not worry about us, we're going to cope. Preserve yourselves.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
invent some pseudo-religious Catholic honorific he needs to fly to Rome to receive-- "The Bigly Popist Medal of Bigliness." No need to make it sound real or use Latin
But "Fortibus es in ero"* would be most appropriate.
_________________________
* For those who have never seen it:
O sibili si ergo,
Fortibus es in ero.
O nobili, demis trux.
Si vatis enim? Causan dux!
Don't attempt to translate -- simply read it literally.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Could I put a question to USAnian Shipmates.
You've probably picked up that he's bigly unpopular over here.
However, as he's your President, even though many of you wish he wasn't, if the UK were to withdraw his invitation, would those of you who don't like him be sympathetic, or would your identification with your country cause you to feel this as an emotional affront to your country?
I would love England even more! I do identify with my country, but no way, no how do I identify with Trump. No sympathy from me.
I may be slightly miffed we don't get a short vacay as promised from the guy. I might try crying "no backsies!" But in the end I'd admit he's our problem so not fair to foist on you even if only for a few days. Sigh
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on
:
Yeah, no loyalty to him. Despite all the literalists who keep explaining that he is our president, that's the real spirit of #notmypresident. Feel free to disinvite him.
Posted by Ohher (# 18607) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Could I put a question to USAnian Shipmates.
You've probably picked up that he's bigly unpopular over here.
However, as he's your President, even though many of you wish he wasn't, if the UK were to withdraw his invitation, would those of you who don't like him be sympathetic, or would your identification with your country cause you to feel this as an emotional affront to your country?
Posted by Ohher (# 18607) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Could I put a question to USAnian Shipmates.
You've probably picked up that he's bigly unpopular over here.
However, as he's your President, even though many of you wish he wasn't, if the UK were to withdraw his invitation, would those of you who don't like him be sympathetic, or would your identification with your country cause you to feel this as an emotional affront to your country?
Sorry -- apparently my long absence has erased my small ability to manage how to post.
Frankly, I doubt 44.5's (Because, after all, he's only half-baked) supporters would give a hoot if Their Hero were disinvited. But I do think any actual disinvitation would have to be worded carefully. In fact, I think Her Majesty's government would be wise instead to offer, pre-visit, a detailed itinerary. These plans should include encounters with the various Scots folks outraged by the golf course up there; a great deal of walking to view assorted non-gold-colored historic interiors (no golf carts, sadly, available); encounters with extremely cultured representatives of the fine arts; encounters with the upper echelons of Oxbridge scholars, especially those studying and/or developing solutions for climate change; and so on. Utmost care must be taken to avoid meetings with anyone with whom the talking yam might have something in common.
As he seems to have a remarkably narrow range of interests -- beauty contests, real estate, and his public image -- it should be possible to keep him paralyzed with boredom for a fortnight or so should he accept, while providing him with ample motivation for declining the invitation.
I know Prince Philip is now retired, but surely a lengthy private meeting could be arranged, if the Prince is sufficiently well to offer a few of his famously offensive remarks.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
-MOST- crucially, no young women. Staid matrons of over sixty only. Warn them all to carry big handbags of heavy leather, and train them to hold the bags not over one arm, but in both hands positioned centrally. This is VERY important. If you want to weaponize them I suggest weighting the bags with a lump of lead, but as they are they will be the necessary shield.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
invent some pseudo-religious Catholic honorific he needs to fly to Rome to receive-- "The Bigly Popist Medal of Bigliness." No need to make it sound real or use Latin
But "Fortibus es in ero"* would be most appropriate.
_________________________
* For those who have never seen it:
O sibili si ergo,
Fortibus es in ero.
O nobili, demis trux.
Si vatis enim? Causan dux!
Don't attempt to translate -- simply read it literally.
My Dad's version had "pisan dux".
[ 09. June 2017, 14:53: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
No, no - you can't put pisan dux together, or the dux would eat the pis....
IJ
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
If Trump cannot be disinvited then the UK should respond in two ways. News coverage kept to the minimum and population of London ignoring presence of the petulant one.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Yes indeed. I wonder how many people in the UK would be bothered, though, to turn out, and stand in the street, just to see The Great Orange Wen pass by?
A few tourists, maybe, and the odd (very odd) red-neck from USAnia, but no-one else would care, would they?
Unless they were wearing one of the wonderful pussy-hats, now so freely available?
IJ
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
If Trump cannot be disinvited then the UK should respond in two ways. News coverage kept to the minimum and population of London ignoring presence of the petulant one.
Invite both Trump & Obama. Thousands show up to shake Obama's hand, listen to his resonate speaking voice, do push-ups with Michelle. He receives some appropriate honorific from the Queen. Trump stands before a podium in an empty hall. Queen says "hello" while fixing him with that trademark withering stare that says "I'm watching you."
Then watch the Trumpsters claim his crowd was the bigliest in UK history.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Invite both Trump & Obama. Thousands show up to shake Obama's hand, listen to his resonate speaking voice, do push-ups with Michelle. He receives some appropriate honorific from the Queen. Trump stands before a podium in an empty hall. Queen says "hello" while fixing him with that trademark withering stare that says "I'm watching you."
Then watch the Trumpsters claim his crowd was the bigliest in UK history.
I love this idea! (And please, may Barack and Michelle ride in the gold coach?)
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Oh, this would be lovely. Absolutely impossible, but what a vision... (drifts off in happy fantasy)
Alternately, she could invite Comey.
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
I get the impression Ms. May regrets the pictures of her holding hands with Mr. Trump in the White House Rose Garden.
If she wants to keep the PM job, I think it would be to her advantage to delay honoring that invitation for at least a couple of years to give us time to remove him from office. Four, at the most.
And, no, in no way would I be offended if Trump would be disinvited by your Parliment.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
According to The Grauniad, Trump's visit to the UK is now on hold.
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
According to The Grauniad, Trump's visit to the UK is now on hold.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
O Lord, we really, really, really wanna thank you for being such a really, really, really, wonderful God, and granting us this, the smallest of the really, really, really great mercies you have vouchsafed to us in our recent trials and triubulations....
IJ
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
Political turmoils, an excellent and unassailable excuse to put off visits. Yes, you are to be congratulated. There is no case on record in which anyone has ever gotten anything helpful from contact with Lyin' Don.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
If someone were to sabotage his tanning lotion, he might become so tarry-visaged as to be either (a) arrested on sight in the UK, or (b) refused re-entry into the USA on suspicion of being not only brown, but a Muslim .....
I think I need to check my meds.
IJ
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
If someone were to sabotage his tanning lotion, he might become so tarry-visaged as to be either (a) arrested on sight in the UK, or (b) refused re-entry into the USA on suspicion of being not only brown, but a Muslim .....
I think I need to check my meds.
IJ
Has anyone ever seen his birth certificate?
Posted by Ohher (# 18607) on
:
No need; we have pix of him dancing with the Saudis.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
It seems as though The Visitation Of The Saviour Of The World to lil'ol England may still go ahead...
...unless security forces can persuade Him that His Orange Skin might be in jeopardy, perhaps.
Can't find the link at the moment, but I think it was on BBC News (and therefore True).
IJ
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Here it is:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40241220
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
IJ
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
THIS IS BREAKING FAST
One hour ago, BBC reported Trump still was planning on visiting Britain.
Eight minutes ago the New York Times is saying it may be delayed--even canceled Report Here.
Three reasons given:
Trump does not want to see all the protests.
He got too tired the last time
He prefers having world leaders come to HIM--the almighty one.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
THIS IS BREAKING FAST
One hour ago, BBC reported Trump still was planning on visiting Britain.
Eight minutes ago the New York Times is saying it may be delayed--even canceled Report Here.
Three reasons given:
Trump does not want to see all the protests.
He got too tired the last time
He prefers having world leaders come to HIM--the almighty one.
So now that you have all those gold coaches and deluxe fancy-pants presidential suites gone empty, have you got room for-- oh, about 65 million of your former colonists who are having a change of heart?
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
So now that you have all those gold coaches and deluxe fancy-pants presidential suites gone empty, have you got room for-- oh, about 65 million of your former colonists who are having a change of heart?
We're going to be looking for large numbers of people to staff the NHS and pick strawberries. The only catch is you won't be able to afford to live closer than two hours' commute away from your work, or five hours' if you have to use Southern Rail.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
already trying to learn the words to "God save the Queen..."
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
Last September Mr. Trump released a glowing medical report and claimed that “he had better stamina than anyone else” and “bragged of his strength and endurance on the campaign trail” ( New York Times, 15 September 2016).
But then again, today’s New York Times article cited by Gramps49 mentioned that he “was visiting his golf course in Bedminster, N.J., over the weekend.” This is the jerk who criticized how much President Obama played golf ("I'm going to be working for you; I'm not going to have time to go play golf," Trump said during a 2016 event in Virginia”) -- and guess who’s spent more weekends on his various golf courses than any other President.
Inconsistency, thy name is Trump.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
already trying to learn the words to "God save the Queen..."
It looks like he might need to learn La Marseillaise first (link in French)
Macron raises his poker game once again!
Posted by ThunderBunk (# 15579) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
already trying to learn the words to "God save the Queen..."
It looks like he might need to learn La Marseillaise first (link in French)
Macron raises his poker game once again!
What on earth is the less-orange president up to? Is there some kind of trolling involved? Will the 14 July celebrations involve a revival of the guillotine?
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
Like I say, I think it's a game of chicken. Macron's previous coup was staging Putin's state visit at Versailles. He's good at this kind of stuff.
Also, attending the 14th of July celebrations would not involve Trump being anywhere near any protestors.
Posted by Crśsos (# 238) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
It looks like he might need to learn La Marseillaise first (link in French)
Google translation into English.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
already trying to learn the words to "God save the Queen..."
It looks like he might need to learn La Marseillaise first (link in French)
Not Trump-- ME! I'm learning "God save the Queen" in hopes she'll turn the page, wipe the slate clean, and let 65 million or so of her former colonists back in the empire. No hard feelings???
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on
:
I think I am officially in a country run by Nicholas Machiavel.
I suspect “game of chicken” is right. Trump must know somewhere in the bottom of what passes for his heart that he is, ahem, not liked on this side of the Atlantic. Now he’s gone cold on visiting her Maj because people might be mean to him, Manu is needling him with another offer he’ll be too scared to take up.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
lver--
"Manu"?
Thanks.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
A guess - 'Manu' is short for 'Emmanuel', oui ?
IJ
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
As my local Catholic archbishop referred to him in conversation recently, "Our Emmanuel of Paris".
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
cliffdweller: quote:
I'm learning "God save the Queen" in hopes she'll turn the page, wipe the slate clean, and let 65 million or so of her former colonists back in the empire. No hard feelings???
Are you sure you really want to come, if Mayhem and Co. get their way and privatise the NHS?
Parts of the US might prefer to be readmitted to the Spanish Empire. Then you'd have guaranteed membership of the EU. And Louisiana could rejoin France...
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Michael Flanders' final remark, before beginning the song, is worthy of note:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vh-wEXvdW8
IJ
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on
:
Sorry. Manu is the standard diminutive for Emmanuel.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Which, of course, being interpreted, means God with us.
Is M. Macron about to take over the Lordship Of The World from The Odious Orange Ozymandias?
![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
IJ
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on
:
Meh. Not sure about that. Much as I’m enjoying Macron’s game-playing with Trump (remember the weaponised handshake), I think we have to accept that the Leader of the Free World these days is Angela Merkel. Which gives us the consolation of knowing that even though Hillary didn’t get elected, a woman still ended up with the job.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Even though I'm a bloke, I tend to agree....though I still wish the USAnians would send us Michelle Obama to Rule Over Us....
IJ
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
He's said yes. Your move, Manu.
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
Manu's a banker, isn't he? I am sure he has dealt with people like the Odious Orange Ozymandias before...
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on
:
ISTM that Manu's tactics so far are mostly about saying "I'm not scared of you, you big vulgar orange monster. Oh and by the way, I'm with her (points at Frau Merkel)."
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Ah, so Manu is from Marcon's first name. Thx.
Posted by Ohher (# 18607) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Manu's a banker, isn't he? I am sure he has dealt with people like the Odious Orange Ozymandias before...
!!! There are others like the OOO? OMG . . .
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ohher:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Manu's a banker, isn't he? I am sure he has dealt with people like the Odious Orange Ozymandias before...
!!! There are others like the OOO? OMG . . .
Sure there are. The OOO is just the bigliest of them.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
I rather like the way my name for trump - The Odious Orange Ozymandias - has caught on (possibly assisted by alliteration's amazingly artful and amusing aid).
Feel free to use it, all, though My People will be getting in touch with Your People in due time.
IJ
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I rather like the way my name for trump - The Odious Orange Ozymandias - has caught on (possibly assisted by alliteration's amazingly artful and amusing aid).
Feel free to use it, all, though My People will be getting in touch with Your People in due time.
Thank you oh Ale Approving Alliterator, I have just used it in a Guardian comment .
Your cheque is in the post.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Well done!
(The royalties, of course, will all be donated to Charry Tee.)
IJ
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
Has anyone noticed that the initials OOO look like zero-zero-zero? It's as if he tried to become the Antichrist (666) but failed to make the grade...
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Has anyone noticed that the initials OOO look like zero-zero-zero? It's as if he tried to become the Antichrist (666) but failed to make the grade...
Or else he just won a game of Tic Tac Toe.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
The headline says it all: Trump Confirms London Trip. He also promises to sign a 'very powerful trade deal.' Lock up your silver, okay? And make sure he pays in advance for everything. Do not agree to bill him later!
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
I know where the power in that Very powerful trade deal will be. The UK will be swallowed up like a forty year old virgin.
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
It looks very much as if our Trade Secretary is committed in advance to some sort of deal with the Americans. Do I detect echoes of 'I will be with you whatever'?
Truly, the patients are running the mental hospital.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
I wonder if Trump will actually go or if he'll send Ivanka in his place.
And I hope he remembers to make hotel reservations this time. (Actually I hope he forgets...)
I do realize that someone on his staff should have made those arrangements for him, but the fact that this wasn't done shows what an incompetent staff he has appointed.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
Don't let the sons anywhere near animals, and consider investing in chastity belts for female staff. I am sure he does not know the meaning of the term 'vagina dentata' and it would be a service to the nation if you educated him.
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
What if May gets a no confidence vote, and the government has to change before the planned visit?
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
What if May gets a no confidence vote, and the government has to change before the planned visit?
Better yet -- let's hope the U.S. has a change of government.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
posted by Gramps49 quote:
What if May gets a no confidence vote, and the government has to change before the planned visit?
Nothing changes. It isn't Mrs May who has invited DT, it is Her Majesty's Government. In the same way if, say, DT were to resign before the visit then Mike Pence would come because he would be the President.
There are only three things which can stop the state visit:- the UK Government makes a convincing case that the security concerns are so great they cannot guarantee the President's safety;
- the US government decides the UK is such a dangerous place they prefer not to put the President in harm's way;
- the sovereign or her consort dies and there is full court mourning.
The first two are unlikely, bearing in mind the numerous visits made by presidents Bush and Obama after 2001. The third is in the lap of the gods.
In any case the visit is only likely to be delayed, an outright cancellation is not on the cards.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
Best comment of the day -
"Theresa, my dear, I desperately want you to arrange my visit to visit England, do you think you could pull it off for me?"
"Donald darling, which would you like me to do first?"
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Best comment of the day -
"Theresa, my dear, I desperately want you to arrange my visit to visit England, do you think you could pull it off for me?"
"Donald darling, which would you like me to do first?"
Prescient, apparently. quote:
“I still want to come, but I’m in no rush,” Trump reportedly said to May. “So, if you can fix it for me, it would make things a lot easier.”
“When I know I’m going to get a better reception,” the president said, “I’ll come and not before.”
Source.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Recently, the news has occasionally mentioned that the White House says T won't be doing this trip this year.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
The White House had previously announced 2018.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
Since becoming president Trump has visited several countries, and any protests against him have been manageable. I don't see why the UK should be any different. Has he offended British people more than he's offended anyone else?
As for the Queen, I'm sure it's already been said that she's used to hosting world leaders who have dodgy reputations.
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
Well, there was that small matter of him declaring the democratically-elected mayor of our largest city persona non grata in the US, simply for being a Muslim...
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Since becoming president Trump has visited several countries, and any protests against him have been manageable. I don't see why the UK should be any different. Has he offended British people more than he's offended anyone else?
As for the Queen, I'm sure it's already been said that she's used to hosting world leaders who have dodgy reputations.
The fear might be we'd find some way of changing the locks after he left town so you'd be stuck with him forever. Suckers!
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
Contrary to Mail-, Express- and Torygraph-readers' belief, Britain isn't going to be great enough to be worth the trouble, post-Brexit. And we still have to sign up to that great and beautiful trade deal . . .
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
By 2018, the UK will be in such dire straits ( aka shite) that we won't give a twopenny cuss whether Ozymandias visits, or whether he doesn't.
IJ
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
Bumping this up. I heard from NPR that Trump plans on coming to London to see the new US Embassy. He is planning on meeting with PM May, but he will not be visiting the Queen. Too bad (NOT).
[ 21. December 2017, 01:06: Message edited by: Gramps49 ]
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
Start knitting the pussy hats now!
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Bumping this up. I heard from NPR that Trump plans on coming to London to see the new US Embassy.
So is he visiting the US Embassy in London, or is he declaring another city the capital and opening the Embassy there?
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
Start knitting the pussy hats now!
I should mention that Drumpf will visit in February.
Is it wishful thinking by that time Scotland Yard or someone will find enough evidence to charge this man with a crime against women?
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Bumping this up. I heard from NPR that Trump plans on coming to London to see the new US Embassy. He is planning on meeting with PM May, but he will not be visiting the Queen. Too bad (NOT).
Aw. I bet the queen is heartbroken. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
May will have to tell the queen what she missed.
Posted by Kittyville (# 16106) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Bumping this up. I heard from NPR that Trump plans on coming to London to see the new US Embassy.
So is he visiting the US Embassy in London, or is he declaring another city the capital and opening the Embassy there?
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Bumping this up. I heard from NPR that Trump plans on coming to London to see the new US Embassy. He is planning on meeting with PM May, but he will not be visiting the Queen. Too bad (NOT).
Aw. I bet the queen is heartbroken.
May will have to tell the queen what she missed.
Yesterday, I surfed into "Christmas With the Queen: Surprising Royal Family Holiday Traditions" (Cheatsheet).
I think she can stay happily busy--and will be away into February.
Some fun pics/clips of Herself, BTW. Over here, we usually only get pics where she's reserved. In some of these, she appears to be relaxed and really having fun.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
1. Donald Trump can't be coming to London "to see the new US Embassy" since plans for the building have only just been released (and pretty ghastly it looks too IMHO).
2. It isn't up to HM to disinvite him since he has been asked for a state visit, so it would be up to the state, in the shape of the government, to withdraw the invitation.
3. However, since no date was mentioned at the time the invitation was made, it can be delayed for any length of time.
In fact, if the government like to suggest that it waits until the new embassy is completed it would likely not take place until around 2021 at the earlier, and possibly considerably later - by which time, of course, DJT may no longer be POTUS
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
1. Donald Trump can't be coming to London "to see the new US Embassy" since plans for the building have only just been released (and pretty ghastly it looks too IMHO).
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
According to the London Evening Standard it's been built and will be opened, possibly by Mr Trump, in February. Unless this is the most blatant example of retrospective planning permission ever?
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
The picture of the Embassy on BBC News and in the Times looked like the Borg mother-ship. And it's surrounded by a moat, to keep the natives at bas. So much for the Special Relationship. We can't blame Trump for the way it looks, though.
Posted by Honest Ron Bacardi (# 38) on
:
It was given planning permission in 2012.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Good luck to them having it ready for February: when I drove past 6 weeks ago it looked far from ready.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
I hope The Great Gropo visits every room.
And is found dead in each one of them.
(I'll get me sou'wester and oilskin jacket, and walk the plank meself....)
IJ
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
What a great idea for a new edition of Clue!
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
My understanding is that the visit will not officially be a "state" visit.
The Queen has been known to break with tradition when she friends it expedient.
Having over 2 million of her subjects signing a petition not to receive Trump in a state visit is expedient, in my book.
[ 22. December 2017, 16:32: Message edited by: Gramps49 ]
Posted by Stephen (# 40) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I hope The Great Gropo visits every room.
And is found dead in each one of them.
(I'll get me sou'wester and oilskin jacket, and walk the plank meself....)
IJ
Now that would be a mystery that would require the combined talents of Miss Marple, M.Hercule Poirot at the very least to solve......
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Not to mention Lord Peter Wimsey, Lady Harriet Wimsey, and the ubiquitous Bunter....
IJ
Posted by Stephen (# 40) on
:
......and I think The Saint, Remington Steel and Columbo.......after all we would need to think international...... ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
.....and I haven't even had a drop of wine yet. Honest!
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
Nero Wolfe would sort it all out and wouldn't even have to leave his house to do so.
Posted by Ohher (# 18607) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Nero Wolfe would sort it all out and wouldn't even have to leave his house to do so.
Archie Goodwin, on the other hand, would have a grand time ordering glasses of milk in pubs.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
With Lily Rowan at his elbow. Ah, a fellow Wolfie!
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
Our Newseek is reporting that Ms May has said Trump will be getting his state visit, but no date has been given.
I hope it will rain on his parade, rain cabbage, eggs and tomatoes and other rotten vegetables or fruits.
I hope he will see many backsides and many moons from those backsides.
May should not be able to dictate what HM does if he comes.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
I hope it will rain on his parade, rain cabbage, eggs and tomatoes and other rotten vegetables or fruits.
"Let the sky rain potatoes; let it thunder to the tune of ‘Green Sleeves;’ hail kissing-comfits and snow eringoes; let there come a tempest of provocation..."
(But that play was written during the time of the previous Queen Elizabeth.)
[ 09. January 2018, 03:51: Message edited by: Pigwidgeon ]
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Bizarre thought:
T doesn't drink, due to a brother's death from alcoholism. Does he attend events where there's drinking? If it's a party at one of his properties, he could easily make it a dry event.
I'm guessing there will be alcohol at the wedding reception?
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Probably there will be (champers, at the very least), but I really can't see the Evil Orange One being invited anyway.
Perhaps they should invite just the poor, bewitched, Melancholia, to give the unfortunate Ensorcelled One a day away from the Goblin's clutches.
O, the priceless Tweets that would ensue!
![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
IJ
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
I find it very difficult indeed to imagine people signing up for the club at Mar-A-Lago (the initiation fee is $200,000! And then there's the yearly dues after that!) if it's a dry facility. He must allow others (other rich people, anyway) to drink even if he himself is not imbibing.
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I find it very difficult indeed to imagine people signing up for the club at Mar-A-Lago (the initiation fee is $200,000! And then there's the yearly dues after that!) if it's a dry facility. He must allow others (other rich people, anyway) to drink even if he himself is not imbibing.
It does not surprise me; even at my lowly level in society I know of people paying $25,000 a year to belong to a country club, on top of a $75,000 admission fee. They do so for the dubious privilege of only meeting people like themselves, which they deem to be very valuable indeed.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
The resultant in-breeding possibly explains the low intellectual levels of people like the King Of Mar-a-Lago....
IJ
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
(In case you're not kidding.)
His mom was from Scotland, and his paternal grandfather came from Germany. So inbreeding is unlikely.
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
(In case you're not kidding.)
His mom was from Scotland, and his paternal grandfather came from Germany. So inbreeding is unlikely.
How do you get Scotland out of Norfolk? I assume you are speaking of Lady Diana Spencer who was an offshoot of the junior branch of the Marlborough Dukedom?
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
No, T's family, in response to BF's post just above mine.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
To which I might add that I said like the King of Maralago...
I suspect the latter's intellectual difficulties may be due to other causes.
Either way, it was an unkind comment on my part.
IJ
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
Then again, can Trump disinvite himself?
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
It would seem so, as long as we p**s him off royally, a bit in advance....
Perhaps by telling him that The Awful Obamas have bought Buck House as a holiday home? He might believe it.
IJ
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
Have a look at Twitter #ICancelledMyTripToLondon
It’s hilarious!
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
Well done, Mr Trump. You have now made it impossible for the Queen, many of whose subjects originate in countries you would no doubt describe as 'shit-holes', to receive you. She is also Head of a Commonwealth that includes several of those countries.
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
Rumor here is that the terror of demonstrations, the prospect of a sea of pussyhats in Trafalgar Square, has kept him away. I heartily congratulate you, keep up the good work! You do not want him in your country -- God knows we don't.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
Well done, Mr Trump. You have now made it impossible for the Queen, many of whose subjects originate in countries you would no doubt describe as 'shit-holes', to receive you. She is also Head of a Commonwealth that includes several of those countries.
And is Queen of many of those countries, just as much as of the UK.
[ 12. January 2018, 20:12: Message edited by: Gee D ]
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Indeed, though I'm not sure how The Arbiter Of Sh**holes cannot still be received by Her Majesty, however distasteful such a meeting might be to her.
Sadly, he is still Head of State of a country with which we have (or should I say had) a Special Relationship, so I guess an official state visit could still take place .
Mind you, President Cowardy-Cowardy Custard would probably cry off, in case some Nasty Brown People showed up, and insulted him....
IJ
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
Cry off is what he has done, apparently. Never been more jealous of y'all
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Yes, but AIUI he's simply refusing to come across the pond to open the new Embassy - the proposed Official State Visit is a special treat for us (and HM) to look forward to later.
Not.
Anyway, perhaps he'll soon disappear up his own sh**hole, and spare us all some grief. Wasn't he due for a medical examination round about now?
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Indeed, though I'm not sure how The Arbiter Of Sh**holes cannot still be received by Her Majesty, however distasteful such a meeting might be to her.
She may be advised by her government of the UK to receive him , but her governments of a long list of countries not to, and further advised that she should tell him of the limited basis of his reception. She would no doubt do as she has for the last 66 years and follow the advice of her government.
Posted by Ohher (# 18607) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Yes, but AIUI he's simply refusing to come across the pond to open the new Embassy - the proposed Official State Visit is a special treat for us (and HM) to look forward to later.
Not.
Anyway, perhaps he'll soon disappear up his own sh**hole, and spare us all some grief. Wasn't he due for a medical examination round about now?
Brief mention on the TV evening news. Apparently he's in "excellent health" despite a steady diet of tacos, McD's, diet Coke and chocolate cake.
Must be a Republican physician.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
Or a very flawed test regimen.
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
No doubt H.M. will do her duty as always, trying not to hold her nose, but the atmosphere at the State Banquet will probably be distinctly frosty.
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
And of course it's all fake news anyway.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Oh yes - made up by the Chinese, or the Haitians, or the Mexicans, or every Muslim in the world, especially Obama.....
Please God, let the Father of Sh**holes never set foot on our Fair Land. Having BoJo The Clown and his friends here is bad enough.
IJ
Posted by John Holding (# 158) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Indeed, though I'm not sure how The Arbiter Of Sh**holes cannot still be received by Her Majesty, however distasteful such a meeting might be to her.
She may be advised by her government of the UK to receive him , but her governments of a long list of countries not to, and further advised that she should tell him of the limited basis of his reception. She would no doubt do as she has for the last 66 years and follow the advice of her government.
As this is about a state visit (or not) to the UK, the opinions of HM's other governments are of course not a factor.
John
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
I think the government must be keenly aware that being expected to take part in a ceremonial carriage drive through London from Winfield House to Buckingham Palace through streets lined with demonstrators is not something any reasonable person would wish to impose on our 91 year-old monarch and her 96 year-old consort.
As for Mr Trump himself: it has been remarked on that at no stage of his life has DJT made any significant and lasting friendships: sure, there are people who have been employees for a long time but same-level friendship seems to have been beyond him all his life. That would go so way towards explaining his crassness, insensitivity, touchiness, inability to cope with criticism and narcissism.
Put another way, what all the tweets and foul-mouthed ranting are really saying is "Why doesn't anybody like me?". Sad in a small child, profoundly disturbing in a man in his 70s who happens to be POTUS.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
I know that John Holding, but it's a good thought.
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
Thing about his latest physical is he refused to submit to a mental health eval or neurological exam. He refused to submit to a cognitive function test which people over 65 usually have on an annual basis.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
He refused to submit to a cognitive function test which people over 65 usually have on an annual basis.
I'll be 73 in two weeks and have never had a cognitive function test -- didn't even know they exist.
Fortunately I'm cognitive and still functioning -- at least for now. ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif)
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Ah, Miss Amanda - they may be testing you without you knowing it......
IJ
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
I recently had my first post-Medicare annual physical. While she was doing the physical exams and tests, she asked me a few memory-related questions and had me perform some really, really simple tasks (e.g., folding a sheet of paper in half). She said I had a score of 100%!
Several friends have mentioned to me that this is part of the routine for a Medicare physical.
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
The tests are really very simple as pointed out above. The routine my Dr gives me is to ask me to remember some words. We then discuss something else and then he asks me what were the words he asked me to remember.
Typical cognitive tests here.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Yes, I've had similar tests - mostly when I was in hospital in 2016, following brain surgery, and had a series of epileptic seizures.
IIRC, this was just about the time when the election of Sadiq Khan as Mayor of London was in the news, so the fact that I answered correctly the question 'Who is the Mayor of London?' reassured everyone that I was OK....
I wonder what The Lord Of Lies' answer would be if they asked him who the POTUS was...?
IJ
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0