Thread: The Celebrity Welly Brigade Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=026896
Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on
:
About time we consigned the Wellie Brigade to Hell
To begin with the Politicians. Cameron; Clegg and Red Ed.
Followed by Royalty in the form of |William and Harry
All in it for the publicity. And photo shoots.
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on
:
Whilst it would piss me off no end if a bunch of wet politicians were wandering around mugging for the cameras whilst I was trying to work out how to deal with a destructive flood, in all fairness, they are damned if they do (annoying publicity seekers) and damned if they don't (heartless and uncaring).
However, they can go to hell on general principles.
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on
:
At least William and Harry did something to help while they were there. That's more than can be said for the politicians.
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
At least William and Harry did something to help while they were there. That's more than can be said for the politicians.
Oh and how long were they there for then? Did they bring their sandwiches and stay all day? Did they have to pee in a bucket like everyone else because no toilets are connected - or did they have a man who did it for them?
I think not ....
The last thing you want when you're going through that kind of trauma is some bright spark getting involved who you know is a) only there for the cameras and b) you'll have to come behind when they're gone and redo the "work" they've done.
Try Devon and Foot and Mouth 2001 if you want more examples .... I happened to be there and saw the publicity machine in full force as well as Govt incompetance.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I think at least William and Harry did something for a while. The politicians just looks at water and said "We will spend whatever it takes, as long as it is within my contingency budget".
Meanwhile, they are cutting the money to the Environment Agency, the Firefighters, the Coastguard - all of the agencies that have been working so hard over the last few months to make a difference.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
I agree.
I'm especially tired of seeing newsreaders reporting knee deep in water - they are even competing now and getting in chest high waders.
The main bloomin anchor person has been starting the news in water in wellies.
I'm sure these people go back to nice dry cars and homes after their bit. It's so fake.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
We should go back to radio, dammit. And Foley sound effects.
Posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger (# 8891) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by JonahMan:
in all fairness, they are damned if they do (annoying publicity seekers) and damned if they don't (heartless and uncaring).
I agreee up to a point, however, it's galling that they seemed to show no concern until the Tory heartlands started to flood - then "money's no object"
Why isn't "money no object" when it comes to helping people who are having to rely on foodbanks? Oh, that's right, because the Daily Heil and assorted cronies like to portray them as feckless scroungers.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
I thought that remark might come back to haunt Cameron - money's no object - but I see that it has already been subject to hermeneutics - we don't actually mean it totally literally, you understand. It's kind of allegorical.
Posted by Stejjie (# 13941) on
:
Agree entirely on the politicians. To be fair to the royals (which board is this again), according to this report, from a less-than-royalist newspaper, they had been there since dawn and were intending to try and go unnoticed for as long as possible. So it may have been genuine, at least this time...
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger:
quote:
Originally posted by JonahMan:
in all fairness, they are damned if they do (annoying publicity seekers) and damned if they don't (heartless and uncaring).
I agreee up to a point, however, it's galling that they seemed to show no concern until the Tory heartlands started to flood - then "money's no object"
Why isn't "money no object" when it comes to helping people who are having to rely on foodbanks? Oh, that's right, because the Daily Heil and assorted cronies like to portray them as feckless scroungers.
Oh, I agree, double standards abound. I imagine they view this flood as being an unavoidable act of God (though flood defences etc would have helped), whereas those accessing food banks are feckless lazy scroungers (in spite of the fact that many work extremely hard, and none were the cause of the global economic meltdown). Or at least this is the impression they try and give their supporters, they surely can't be thick enough to actually believe it can they?
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
It's just expediency, isn't it? They're going to get more votes from the flooded Tory heartlands than from food bank users, aren't they? Well, in fact, they may get votes from trashing the latter. But the former have to treated with kid gloves, sorry, wellies.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Gosh, Shamwari, such insight!
Thanks for pointing out that princes William and Harry need publicity and are desperate to be there for some informal photo shoot.
Of course, such a natural response when your late mother was hounded to her death by photo-journalists and paparazzi. ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Posted by jacobsen (# 14998) on
:
I'm with the majority in being unimpressed by the politicians, but feel inclined to give William and Harry some credit. It's quite possible they not only came and worked, but did it willingly - and enjoyed doing it. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
What is more, when stationed in the less comfortable war zones, if such exist, they probably had fairly primitive conditions to cope with, though probably a sandy hole is more salubrious than floating sewage.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Well yes. William and Harry would have got away with it if someone hadn't tipped off the press. And what's more, they even had a go at the journalist for not joining in.
Good for them I say. It's more than we've seen any of the politicians do this past week.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Gosh, Shamwari, such insight!
Thanks for pointing out that princes William and Harry need publicity and are desperate to be there for some informal photo shoot.
Of course, such a natural response when your late mother was hounded to her death by photo-journalists and paparazzi.
The young princes learned from the cradle that a well chosen photo op can earn one a title like, "The Caring Princess," even while doing about one quarter the actual charity work of the less pretty princess -- the one who pointedly refused to pose for staged tear-jerkers saying, "I don't play those games." One charity director was quoted as saying she would rather have one Princess Anne than a dozen Dianas.
The Princes know that a photo not only speaks a thousand words it can cancel a thousand words of criticism from the press about things like firing dozens of palace staff for petty reasons, having random silly affairs, being rude to almost everyone and spending most of her time watching TV and binge eating. Their mother used the press to her advantage from the very first, phoning them herself when she wanted to be "caught," looking her best and doing something nice.
Princess Diana was not "hounded to her death," by the press. She died because she and her boyfriend encouraged their drunk driver to speed through Paris, while she chose to ride without buckling her seatbelt. If she didn't want the paparazzi to try for a picture (not such a terrible thing) she simply could have turned off the interior lights or pulled the limo's curtains. They were joy riding.
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Agree entirely on the politicians. To be fair to the royals (which board is this again), according to this report, from a less-than-royalist newspaper, they had been there since dawn and were intending to try and go unnoticed for as long as possible. So it may have been genuine, at least this time...
May have been - but wouldn't a substantial donation from their wealth - say 25% be better?
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger:
quote:
Originally posted by JonahMan:
in all fairness, they are damned if they do (annoying publicity seekers) and damned if they don't (heartless and uncaring).
I agreee up to a point, however, it's galling that they seemed to show no concern until the Tory heartlands started to flood - then "money's no object"
Why isn't "money no object" when it comes to helping people who are having to rely on foodbanks? Oh, that's right, because the Daily Heil and assorted cronies like to portray them as feckless scroungers.
Yes - funny isn't it that as soon as anything happens close to London then "money is no object" - try telling that to people in Somerset who've been affected for a month.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
Um - Prince Charles has donated £50,000 to the Somerset flood victims, and the Queen is donating food from her farms to the farmers in the Somerset levels. Is that what you meant Exclamation Mark?
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
I'm not surprised that Prince Charles donated so much, he is a tireless worker for all his charities and I'm a big admirer of the Queen, too, for carrying on year after year at what must be the most boring job in the world.
One reason I have such a grudge against Diana is that she managed to use her friends in the press, like Andrew Morton, to speak ill of those two when their position made them unable to defend themselves.
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Um - Prince Charles has donated £50,000 to the Somerset flood victims, and the Queen is donating food from her farms to the farmers in the Somerset levels. Is that what you meant Exclamation Mark?
Nope - nowhere near enough. It's a drop in the ocean for both of them - real giving means real business.
How about a year's revenue from the Duchy? That might go some way towards the needs of those affected.
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on
:
The fatuousness of the reporters is limitless, a couple of week ago Charles visited a flooded area and the reporter made the remark in a voice of amazement ‘he got in a boat.’
The man was in the navy for goodness sake don’t be surprised he could get in a boat...
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Twilight
Don't get me wrong: I'm no apologist for the late Diana, Princess of Wales and only referred to her death in those terms because that is the generally held position.
As for the two young princes: yesterday wasn't their first foray out - they've been making sandbag walls in Old Windsor, just that no one tipped off the press.
How do I know? My cousin-in-law gave them tea while they were toiling near her house.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
The thing is, we don't know - we never will know - how much the royals give in money and assistance. They are giving, and good on them. The politicians, OTOH, are just going in and telling people that they will be spending taxpayers money on helping. Not their own money or time. And most of them can afford to help out as well.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Well, quite. Royals 2, Politicians 0 (og).
Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
At least William and Harry did something to help while they were there. That's more than can be said for the politicians.
Oh and how long were they there for then?
...
[Y]ou'll have to come behind when they're gone and redo the "work" they've done.
Given that Princes William and Harry are serving members of the Armed Forces, what makes you think that their efforts at filling a sandbag will be any worse than those of the hundreds of others Armed Forces personnel doing the same job?
Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on
:
I think William is no longer employed by Ministry of Defence.
retired.
Harry? Who knows?
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
I believe Harry is an apache helicopter gunship pilot.
I used to wonder why they shoved all the royals, (including the queen), through military training - and then it dawned on me that it saves alot on bodyguards.
Sure they have DDP protection, but if anyone gets close enough to fight they might be in for a surprise.
Posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger (# 8891) on
:
Yes, I can imagine the Queen issuing a swift knee to one's knackers.
Posted by Jahlove (# 10290) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Um - Prince Charles has donated £50,000 to the Somerset flood victims, and the Queen is donating food from her farms to the farmers in the Somerset levels. Is that what you meant Exclamation Mark?
Nope - nowhere near enough. It's a drop in the ocean for both of them - real giving means real business.
How about a year's revenue from the Duchy? That might go some way towards the needs of those affected.
Despite the government's saying they should be free, Cornwall Council's sub-contractor, Cormac is charging resident £3 per sandbag.
The Council That Cares <sarcasm font>
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Agree entirely on the politicians. To be fair to the royals (which board is this again), according to this report, from a less-than-royalist newspaper, they had been there since dawn and were intending to try and go unnoticed for as long as possible. So it may have been genuine, at least this time...
May have been - but wouldn't a substantial donation from their wealth - say 25% be better?
Bloody hell. The politicians get criticised for just standing around talking about money and not actually doing anything while they're in the flood zone.
The royals pitch in and actually do something while they're in the flood zone, and you come along to criticise them for not giving money instead.
I wouldn't last long in a position of power, I tell you, because when someone like you came along I'd be caught on camera telling you to fuck off and get a life.
Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on
:
Frankly, I would celebrate the Royals helping out with our bush fires. We always need another wet blanket.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The royals pitch in and actually do something while they're in the flood zone, and you come along to criticise them for not giving money instead.
Yeah, how much shit did Bush II eat for observing Katrina from above in a plane?
Sean Penn, on the other hand, got out in a rowboat and started hauling people out of the water, and nobody said he wasn't helping.
And I can't imagine they would participate in flood relief and not donate money--which is easier?
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Twilight
Don't get me wrong: I'm no apologist for the late Diana, Princess of Wales and only referred to her death in those terms because that is the generally held position.
As for the two young princes: yesterday wasn't their first foray out - they've been making sandbag walls in Old Windsor, just that no one tipped off the press.
How do I know? My cousin-in-law gave them tea while they were toiling near her house.
They have tea? Like ordinary people?
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Sean Penn, on the other hand, got out in a rowboat and started hauling people out of the water, and nobody said he wasn't helping.
And I can't imagine they would participate in flood relief and not donate money--which is easier?
Royals did both. Sure Penn did as well. He has been a right wanker in times past, but he does really do the charity bit. Which is more important?
But what is the fun in a balanced viewpoint?
Easier to make a bad joke
quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
Frankly, I would celebrate the Royals helping out with our bush fires. We always need another wet blanket.
or an unsubstantiated whinge.
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's a drop in the ocean for both of them - real giving means real business.
How about a year's revenue from the Duchy? That might go some way towards the needs of those affected.
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
[QUOTE]
1. Bloody hell. The politicians get criticised for just standing around talking about money and not actually doing anything while they're in the flood zone.
2. I wouldn't last long in a position of power, I tell you, because when someone like you came along I'd be caught on camera telling you to fuck off and get a life.
1. Yep. They do. That's not their money - anyway that's the money that should've gone to Somerset weeks ago.
2. Just goes to show how some people can't take the truth. Not a reasoned discussion just swearing and aggression: great.
[ 16. February 2014, 05:14: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
or an unsubstantiated whinge.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's a drop in the ocean for both of them - real giving means real business.
How about a year's revenue from the Duchy? That might go some way towards the needs of those affected.
Point of order: it is a whinge, I agree. But it is substantiated - the Duchy does have an income and they are able to give it away. Why don' they as a gesture of grace?
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
I believe Harry is an apache helicopter gunship pilot.
I used to wonder why they shoved all the royals, (including the queen), through military training - and then it dawned on me that it saves alot on bodyguards.
Sure they have DDP protection, but if anyone gets close enough to fight they might be in for a surprise.
I'm sure Uncle Edward's Royal Marine Training comes in useful somewhere on stage
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
or an unsubstantiated whinge.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's a drop in the ocean for both of them - real giving means real business.
How about a year's revenue from the Duchy? That might go some way towards the needs of those affected.
Point of order: it is a whinge, I agree. But it is substantiated - the Duchy does have an income and they are able to give it away. Why don' they as a gesture of grace?
They do.
Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on
:
Mine was entirely a joke. Bad I'll agree.
Unclench.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
What, do you think you have the concession on being pissy?
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
2. Just goes to show how some people can't take the truth. Not a reasoned discussion just swearing and aggression: great.
The swearing and aggression would be because it's obvious that YOU can't take the truth. In that you have a preconceived view about royalty, and quite possibly people in power generally, and that there's no way to get you to change your mind.
Every time on this thread that you order other people to give away a year's income, or a percentage of their wealth, or a lump sum, I just think "you first".
What are you doing in this crisis, mister? Eh? Apart from sitting at your computer telling other people what to do. People who've actually been down in the floods, piling sandbags at dawn, and who we in fact know were trying to do it without media attention.
Before you start telling other people how much money they should be handing over, I want to see your bloody receipts.
If you think that 50,000 quid is trivial pocket change to the Prince of Wales, then I suggest we rifle through your accounts and work out how much you should be handing over. A few hundred quid at least, I should think. If your income is just one percent of his, then you should be handing over 500 pounds.
No? I didn't bloody think so.
[ 16. February 2014, 07:38: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
But it is substantiated - the Duchy does have an income and they are able to give it away. Why don' they as a gesture of grace?
You seem very keen to give away other people's money. You have, of course, made some charitable effort of some kind yourself, rather than sit on the sidelines and carp about what other people should, in your opinion, be doing?
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
or an unsubstantiated whinge.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's a drop in the ocean for both of them - real giving means real business.
How about a year's revenue from the Duchy? That might go some way towards the needs of those affected.
Point of order: it is a whinge, I agree. But it is substantiated - the Duchy does have an income and they are able to give it away. Why don' they as a gesture of grace?
And deprive the people who normally get the benefit of that money? And I don't mean Charles - that money is used to support the Duchy. At least partly.
As Ariel said - you are very free with other peoples money. Rather like Cameron is.
Posted by Jay-Emm (# 11411) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
If your income is just one percent of his, then you should be handing over 500 pounds.
No? I didn't bloody think so.
If his income was one percent he'd be well in the one percent (>£170k).*
If we're just talking about government grants, then that one percent is still over my income.
*though he does pay taxes (which he legally doesn't have to) and a large proportion goes to charity/good causes. And he pays for staff. But on the other hand that's part of of being a duchy, which fiscally is trivially a net benefit.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
They do.
Thank you. That was what was bugging me out-- why does the fact that someone stuffs a sandbag negate the possibility that they donated money, too? As I was trying to say, writing a check is pretty darn easy.It would seem logical to me that the act of joining in physical relief efforts would supplement a donation, not replace it.
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
[QUOTE]
Every time on this thread that you order other people to give away a year's income, or a percentage of their wealth, or a lump sum, I just think "you first".
If you think that 50,000 quid is trivial pocket change to the Prince of Wales, then I suggest we rifle through your accounts and work out how much you should be handing over. A few hundred quid at least, I should think. If your income is just one percent of his, then you should be handing over 500 pounds.
No? I didn't bloody think so.
My income is rather less than 10% of Charles's - it's actually around £1300 net for 250 - 275 hours work each month.
As to my giving - well yes I do and I have. FYI it's rather more than 10% each month in a variety of directions. I tend to work on the basis that God measures me more by what I keep back than what I give away.
As to getting my hands dirty, well I'm a bit of a distance away. Not so Foot and Mouth in 2001/2002 when it was local to me.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
[QUOTE]
Every time on this thread that you order other people to give away a year's income, or a percentage of their wealth, or a lump sum, I just think "you first".
If you think that 50,000 quid is trivial pocket change to the Prince of Wales, then I suggest we rifle through your accounts and work out how much you should be handing over. A few hundred quid at least, I should think. If your income is just one percent of his, then you should be handing over 500 pounds.
No? I didn't bloody think so.
My income is rather less than 10% of Charles's - it's actually around £1300 net for 250 - 275 hours work each month.
As to my giving - well yes I do and I have. FYI it's rather more than 10% each month in a variety of directions. I tend to work on the basis that God measures me more by what I keep back than what I give away.
As to getting my hands dirty, well I'm a bit of a distance away. Not so Foot and Mouth in 2001/2002 when it was local to me.
Nope. Sorry. You do NOT get out of this by talking about all the other giving you might do. Or by saying 'oh dear, sorry, it's not local to me'.
Is the flood lapping at Prince Charles' door? No. Have you remotely taken into consideration any other giving that Prince Charles does? No.
Either start coughing up help for the flood or keep your mouth shut down here about the contribution of the royals. Your choice.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Is the flood lapping at Prince Charles' door? No. Have you remotely taken into consideration any other giving that Prince Charles does? No.
You don't know what people do privately. For all we know Wills and Harry (and some MPs) may have dumped a sizeable chunk of cash into Justgiving or something similar recently.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Exactly. That's my point.
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
See my sig, if the cognitive dissonance of ranting about donation without putting your hand in your wallet gets you.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
It's also unfair to just look at the cause that's in the news this minute and only count the contributions to that. They already keep a dozen things funded through "The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry." Who knows how much time and money they pour into that. They may feel that the starving children or the war veterans they support are as important as this flood.
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on
:
I think I would prefer to work with these Links given by Arthur Rank Centre which does a lot of work with Rural Churches.
Jengie
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
Mine was entirely a joke. Bad I'll agree.
Unclench.
Oh sweetie, there was no enmity in my remark. I just wished you'd made an effort.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
It's also unfair to just look at the cause that's in the news this minute and only count the contributions to that. They already keep a dozen things funded through "The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry." Who knows how much time and money they pour into that. They may feel that the starving children or the war veterans they support are as important as this flood.
Also, notably, there is the Prince's Trust, and I quote from their website:
"The Prince's Trust was founded in 1976 by The Prince of Wales. Having completed his duty in the Royal Navy, His Royal Highness became dedicated to improving the lives of disadvantaged young people in the UK, and began The Trust to deliver on that commitment."
The Prince's Trust has helped many people since then and he hasn't lost interest in it over the years, either.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
And Duchy sales in Waitrose, the profits from visitors to Highgrove house and various other incomes are donated to the Prince of Wales' Charitable Foundation.
(I so can't believe I'm doing this, I'm so not a royalist, but I got rubbed up the wrong way by the inverted snobbery and chip-on-their-shoulder nastiness of some people on this thread and bothered to look.)
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Exclamation Mark:
The royals were in Datchet at 5.45am and were still there at 5.30pm.
There were portaloos for some of the people putting out sandbags, those nearest the only pub with functioning plumbing used the pub loos.
Guess what: princes eat and drink just like everyone else.
Do grow up - yes, we've all read about your own hands-on experience during the F&M outbreak. Just accept that the younger royals are prepared to do their bit, with or without cameras being present - although they'd far prefer no cameras.
And Harry has very nice manners and was very appreciative of my cousin's cake.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
Our beloved Prime Minister went on a tour of drought affected areas over the weekend, officially to "listen to the problems of the people ding it tough", but in reality to try to boost an insecure popularity rating by announcing some support plans. As his luck would have it, he could not drive to the town of Bourke because unexpected rain brought flooding on the road. Perhaps you can borrow him for a while and your rain will stop.
The UK PM and equivalent are in the position of all political leaders. If they go and visit, they get damned for just looking and not helping out. If they don't go, they get damned for indifference towards the people who are suffering, whether that be flood or drought.
As for the comments on the young royals. I am a republican and have been since I started to think of such things. But I see no need to be offensive, as offensive as Exclamation Mark, to them.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
And Harry has very nice manners and was very appreciative of my cousin's cake.
Ok, the guy was nice to a Shipmate. He is officially Our Guy.
Posted by David (# 3) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Exclamation Mark:
The royals were in Datchet at 5.45am and were still there at 5.30pm.
There were portaloos for some of the people putting out sandbags, those nearest the only pub with functioning plumbing used the pub loos.
Guess what: princes eat and drink just like everyone else.
And presumably, shit.
Posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger (# 8891) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by David:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Exclamation Mark:
The royals were in Datchet at 5.45am and were still there at 5.30pm.
There were portaloos for some of the people putting out sandbags, those nearest the only pub with functioning plumbing used the pub loos.
Guess what: princes eat and drink just like everyone else.
And presumably, shit.
Somehow, I doubt they eat and drink shit.
Unless it's freshly harvested swan shit.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Oh lawks, the humour down here is wonderful, isn't it? Every day, as I wake up and remember I'm a Hellhost, I wonder what delightful jokes I'm going to get to read.
I mean, sometimes they're so good they even make grammatical sense!!
[ 18. February 2014, 12:56: Message edited by: orfeo ]
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0