BS: Prince Harry - What a star!

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 11:31 AM

No, Jack.

It's wrong for Harry to call an Asian 'Paki', if by doing so he intends to denigrate him and cause hurt.

It's wrong for you to call Harry an 'overprivileged toss-pot' if by doing so you intend to denigrate him and cause hurt.

It's wrong for someone to state on a public forum that someone else is illegitimate, if by doing so they intend to denigrate him and cause hurt.

It's wrong for someone to call someone else 'Fat Cunt' if by doing so they intend to denigrate him and cause hurt.

It's simply a case of consistency - and it's consistency that's missing from the attitudes of some of the posters on here. You can't decry abuse, then go on to be an abuser yourself.

I don't like any sort of abuse. And speaking as a former Fat Cunt, I had plenty.

IMHO and my final word. I've got a life.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Stu
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 11:13 AM

It's OK for Harry to call an asian a paki, but I'm wrong for calling him "and over-privileged tosspot"?*

Can I ask if any of those who are defending Harry currently use these names to the faces of people?







* Actually, in hindsight this is a little personal, so I would agree that wasn't so nice. But the question still stands.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 10:50 AM

So........name-calling (a.k.a. "Abuse") is OK, as long as it's a member of the Royal family (who, incidentally, doesn't have the luxury of being able to argue back, Rosie - certainly not on a public forum like this one) who's the target?

Have I understood you correctly, Rosie?

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 10:44 AM

Regards name calling and hypocricy.

Harry doesn't enter my thoughts much at all I must confess. And to be honest, though I have very strong misgivings about the Royal Family, I think Charlie isn't a bad man. And I think he takes his duties seriously. But if the Royals are to function usefully in any way, and as far as I can see, their sole 'legitimate' function (if any) is as *figureheads*, then their behaviours *must* be exceptional.

I have no feelings about Harry, other than his behaviours indicate to me that he is at best a weak, foolish, ignorant, and evidently over priviliged young man. Whose behaviours on more than one occassion *that we actually know of* again, strongly suggest to me, that he is a chip off the old (with his "slitty-eyes" and "fuzzy-wuzzies") Philip block.

And indeed, I've never called him *any* name in my life, apart from *on this thread*. And that, PURELY to demonstrate what I'd hope might be a pretty self-evident point. Which has obviously not been made... Or has it?

I for one remain distinctly unimpressed, and think that the Royals need to begin seriously cleaning up their act. We are now in a multi-cultural UK. The Wogs, Paki's, and Towelheads as well as the Slitty Eyes, Fuzzie-Wuzzies and Kykes ain't going back 'home', this is their home. With it's Tikka Masalas, Reggae, Irish pubs, Donner Kebabs and now the all new Eastern European Folk Music on our streets.

These people need to recognise that they now must represent *all* citizens of these Isles in order to maintain whatever legitimacy as figureheads for the UK, they may be capable of continuing to make any convincing claim for.

Evidently Eton is utterly worthless as an education for teaching the young Royals how to perform their duties correctly in this modern UK - where they are no-longer rulers of a 'great' Empire, but (exceedingly well paid) public servants of this multi-cultural little island. Well, well. I guess that's not exactly a surprise...

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Stu
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 10:38 AM

"Why is it OK to make some feel they have no talent, or they are worthless human beings, hated, loathed, looked down upon or intellectually bereft..."

Er, what are you talking about? This is about calling asiam people names. As you've probably guessed, I'm a republican and a marxist and believe we are all born equal, regardless of race, creed or gender. I'm not superior to anyone, and equal to everyone, including those for whom birth means privilege provides them with more than most can even dream of.

All that matters is people - and that is the end of it. If those in positions of wealth and privilege can't behave responsibly then they should expect to be taken down a peg or two, especially if they take money from the public purse, where people who can ill-afford to are already giving too much.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 10:31 AM

"Harry wasn't using a nickname, he was using a term based on his skin colour and ethnic origin."

Now could you explain that Stigweard/Sugarfoot Jack??

Oh, by the bye Jim the plural of 'Paki' would be 'Pakis' - no 'e' - Coming from a shortening of the name of the country Pakistan.

Which brings me back to Sugarfoot's remark - "ethnic" origin - WTF were they called before 1947 Jack?? I ask because that was when Pakistan came into being - name didn't exist before then. "Skin colour" what is being referred to is where the person, who by now we have clearly established took no offence at the remark, comes from - exactly the same as 'Jock', 'Taffy', 'Paddy', 'Yank', 'Yarpy', 'Frog', etc.

As to use of such terms in the services have a listen to the introduction on Shep Woolleys, "Norman Docherty and the Chinese Rock & Roll Band" - absolutely hilarious and I would find it very hard to believe that anyone would take offence at it, particulary the main character who did exist in real life.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 10:25 AM

I get your point Jack but, in Backwoods-World, abuse is abuse whether on the basis of skin-colour, parentage, waist-size, whatever.

Do you think that overweight people aren't hurt when others abuse them by calling them 'Fat Cunt' (exactly as I've been abused on many occasions)? You might see it as just 'name-calling'. I see it, and other similar stuff, as an insult made with the intention of causing hurt, and thus it is abuse.

I make no distinctions between different kinds of abuse, and I do my best to avoid indulging in abuse, whether it be racist, sexist, weightist, sexist, anti-Royalist, whatever.

Abuse is abuse. All kinds of abuse are to be deplored. People who criticise others for one kind of abuse, and then go on to perpetrate abuse themselves are indeed hypocrites. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 09:22 AM

"I also think there are many members of 'Hypocrites R Us' in this thread."

Why, because not everyone agrees on a subject?


No.

Because some in here happily fire words at others, with intended malice behind them, choosing to deliberately verbally abuse them, on a personal level. Yet they set themselves up as some kind of saint when it comes to racism.

As I've said before in this thread, please explain to me why one is 'acceptable' and one is not, to the very people who do this.

You cannot say "This Stinks!" whilst causing a stink yourself.

Why is it OK to make some feel they have no talent, or they are worthless human beings, hated, loathed, looked down upon or intellectually bereft...and yet some of the very people who do this are now saying how utterly appalling it is to upset others, when it has 'racism' connected to it?

You cannot have one rule for 'racism' and one rule for everything else.

Racism is a feeling or belief that one race has particular traits and that one race, (that of the racist) is superior to another.

However, feeling that *you* are superior to ANY person, no matter if they are of another race or not, is one of the worst traits in people, in my book.

Feeling that you are 'superior' towards anyone is wrong, surely?

Unless, I guess, you belong to Hypocrites R Us.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 09:15 AM

No,
I have not been in the army - I live in the real world where people like Stephen Lawrence are murdered because they are a nig-nogs, or where Asians have petrol poured through their letter boxes and lit because they are Pakies. At present we are witnessing what amounts to a campaign of ethnic cleansing of Travellers - whoops sorry - knackers is the word used here to assist that particular process.
Nor do I hate the royal family - I consider them an anachronistic hangover from feudalism.
Any hatred I have is reserved for racists who consider it acceptable to use the above terms (and dress in uniforms which symbolize the behaviour described), including those who consider their social standing permits them to do so.
I am not particularly fond of apologists of such behaviour who facilitate these atrocities.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Stu
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 09:06 AM

BWM - we're in danger of getting mixed up here. Calling someone a name is not the same as using a term of racial abuse.

For instance, you might call me a fat talentless twat and you might well be correct and I might be offended but you can call anyone a fat talentless twat regardless of skin colour. You might be being rude and those who live in airy-fairy land and not the real world might baulk at such terms, but people have been trading insults since our ancestors uttered their first sentence.

Harry wasn't using a nickname, he was using a term based on his skin colour and ethnic origin. You could call me a paki, but of course it'd be meaningless as I'm not asian. I judge this to be a racist word because I've heard my friends called when it was being used pejoratively - what do you suggest I do, turn a blind eye?

So, I still think the Royal Family are a bunch of sponging tossers who should bog off, but I would not say they are a bunch of sponging niggers because that is racially offensive to a large proportion of the population the world over, regardless of however many gangsta rappers or Tarantino films bandy the word about.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 08:46 AM

Jack, surely it's very hypocritical when people decry the use of what they judge to be 'racist' words, yet themselves describe members of the Royal family in terms which are equally derogatory, if not more so.

I think that's what Lizzie means (although she's clearly very capable of speaking for herself!) :-)

Let he who is without blemish cast the first stone.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Stu
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 08:39 AM

"I also think there are many members of 'Hypocrites R Us' in this thread."

Why, because not everyone agrees on a subject?

I can actually see Don's point of view, but happen to disagree as my experience of this sort of thing is not one where words like 'Paki' are used as terms of endearment.

Nothing hypocritical about that.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 06:08 AM

Don, I am in absolute and total agreement with you.

I also think there are many members of 'Hypocrites R Us' in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 05:48 AM

No! Sorry, but you can't have the moral high ground, if you regard any reference to black people as racist and unacceptable, while remaining blissfully unmoved by "Taffy", "Yank", "Jock", "Ginger",
"Whitey", and a lot of other references to origin or colour which are apparently exempt from your moral outrage.

Why do you believe that intent is unimportant, when you would all say that those names are affectionate banter.

In fact all of them have, at some time been used as pejorative terms, but have also been acceptable nicknames in military circles, and wouldn't raise an eyebrow here.

Why is that, I wonder? Could it be that in your world, only black people can be insulted?

Incidentally, I watched that video too, and considering that the camera was about four to six feet from the lieutenant, and the only sound was Harry's comment, I find it strange that Ruth should think that he didn't hear, especially as he was sitting looking directly into the lens and obviously aware he was being filmed.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 22 Jan 09 - 03:00 AM

I think a lot of people who are defending Harry are taking it for granted that this was a level of "banter" that was acceptable within the regiment. In fact, he doesn't actually say "Our little Paki friend" to the lad's face, but quietly, far from the soldier's hearing.

Those who describe this as regimental cameraderie are no better informed than those of us who perceive it as a possible example of institutionalised racism. No one knows whether Harry (and others) used this term to the Ahmed Raza Khan's face. We do know that Harry rang him to offer an apology, though - would this have been necessary if the soldier had been aware that this term was regularly used light-heartedly within the regiment? We also know that the soldier's relatives have been deeply offended by the use of the word.

The singer Billy Bragg joined the army in his youth. He was already somewhat disenchanted with the squaddie lifestyle when news came to the regiment one day that Bob Marley had died. Bragg was devastated, as Marley was one of his musical heroes. He was shocked and disgusted, though, by the fact that the barracks room resounded to the jeering racist slurs of his colleagues, who could not acknowledge and respect Marley as one of the greatest musical influences that the world has ever produced, but could only define (and demean) him by his race. Bragg cites this as the turning point which led to him resigning his commission.

While this is something that took place 30 years ago, I think it's fair to say that it is indicative of an institutionalised racism in the British army which it has been fighting ever since, but now and again, just like in the police force, an example comes to public attention which suggests that there's still a long way to go. When one of those examples is provided by a member of the royal family, it's rather inexcusable, IMHO.

Doesn it matter whether a racist slur is used in hatred or in jest? Whether it hurts, or simpply patronises? I don't think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: GUEST,Mr Yeahbut
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 10:52 PM

This thread topic got me thinking much recently about the nature and culture of 'transgresive humour'
amongst friends and social peers..

..even the most educated & enlightened
and devoutly PC amongst us are only human after all,
and not always 100% in control of our deeper darkest naughtiest impulses..

..and that is the wayward part of our complex human psyches
laying in wait to catch us out by surprise
when we hear bad sick jokes we really should not find
the least bit amusing..

but.. occasionally crack us up in hysterics..



and its that aspect of human nature that has always provided ripe pickings
for the edgiest smartest comedians and social satirists
to exploit and manipulate, and reveal to ourselves our baser potential
to laugh out loud at subjects that are just very 'wrong'.


There is absolutely no such thing as a 'good' racist joke..

but sometimes despite our better nature and intentions
they can be really quite funny..

Why ???!! who knows..

This is by no means a justification.. just an observation of our less than perfect human nature..

Whilst thinking, and researching contextual material, I stumbled on this link..


http://www.sickipedia.org/index.php


don't go there if you know you will be angered by vile offensive bad jokes...

I don't recomend or condone it, just provide it as 'food for thought'

most of it is shit.. but there is also evidence of creativity and inventiveness
which far surpasses what the subject matter of any of those nastiest of jokes deserves..

And not too impossible perhaps to draw links with the 'military mindset'
under consideration here..

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 09:57 PM

Those terms are not appropriate. If they are in common use in his regiment, perhaps the regiment should be disbanded as an example.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 07:04 PM

Did you ever serve in the armed forces, Mr Carroll?

If you had, I'm sure you would know that, within that close community, there are certain conventions which would be considered offensive in the outside world.

Among those conventions, the use of nicknames is almost universal in military circles. They do not signify bigotry on the part of users, but rather a degree of easy respect between colleagues with a common purpose.

It is very akin to black people using the term Nigga amongst themselves, which would rightly be inappropriate, if I were to use it.


Somebody saw an opportunity to make some money, stole the video tape, and sold it to the News of the World, thereby bringing the whole matter into the public eye when that scurrilous rag also saw profit in publishing it.

1. Don't try to tell me that aversion to racism played any part in those actions, because you know damn well that neither party gives a damn about anything other than making money.

2. I repeat. This would never have seen the light of day, but for the fact that it was Prince Harry.

3. Your assumption that the lieutenant WAS offended, but dare not say so is simply that, AN ASSUMPTION, without the least evidence or credibility.

4. Do not presume to make assumptions as to whether or not I am a racist.

I loathe racists with a passion, and am the first to speak out against scum like the BNP, but racism is not just about a word, it is also about intent.

I feel that further explanation would be wasted on you as you obviously are incapable of seeing beyond the word to what lies behind.

Indeed you are more bigotted in your hatred of the Royal Family, than I could ever be about race.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 04:00 AM

" made a story out of nothing, in order to increase sales of the dirty rag."
So it's not a term of racist abuse then? - Comforting to know!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 08:18 PM

""So are 'Pakie', 'Towelhead, 'Sooty' and 'Fuzzy-Wuzzie' terms of racist abuse? - we'll never know, I suppose!"

Only when 'ordinary' people use them. ""


Strangely enough Rosie, the exact opposite!!

Do you really believe that the News of the World would have published the same story if it had been you or I that made the comment?

It is the very fact of Harry's celebrity that made a story out of nothing, in order to increase sales of the dirty rag.

And incidentally, Charles' polo team mate is nicknamed "Sooty" because his name is Suttish (uncertain of exact spelling), and has nothing to do with his skin hue. But of course that wouldn't fit with Jim's perception of Charles as racist, so he conveniently ignores it.

Don't be fooled by those who "protest too much". They have their own bigotries.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 07:23 AM

Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn!

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Stu
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 07:01 AM

Yes Jim, they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 05:18 AM

"So are 'Pakie', 'Towelhead, 'Sooty' and 'Fuzzy-Wuzzie' terms of racist abuse? - we'll never know, I suppose!"

Only when 'ordinary' people use them.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 03:08 AM

So are 'Pakie', 'Towelhead, 'Sooty' and 'Fuzzy-Wuzzie' terms of racist abuse? - we'll never know, I suppose!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 12:03 PM

"Ehmmm - They already do pay full-on tax like most people."

"No-one knows what Betty is taxed on her income as it's a secret, and voluntary - it really should be law that the Monarch pays full tax on all her income if she doesn't already."


Mrs. Queen - and Tax



"But I would put this forward as an example in logic as to why "marxists" should never run anything."

"You're right - god forbid anyone but greedy capitalists should be given a chance to balls up the economy."


Ooh, I don't know, New Labour's doing a grand job of that at the moment.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 11:09 AM

Gawd, no-one tell the Queen about that Teribus, else she'll resign! :0) LOL

Some great working out there, well done.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 11:06 AM

You were saying you liked the ale the Duchy make, Jack.. :0)

Duchy Originals Ale

Around The Duchy of Cornwall - Home Farm

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 11:06 AM

"I would say dump the civil list, make the monarchy independent and they can pay full-on tax like most normal people and be in charge of their own destiny."

Ehmmm - They already do pay full-on tax like most people.

But I would put this forward as an example in logic as to why "marxists" should never run anything.

Status Quo - (Not the Band - The current situation)

Government pays civil purse/civil list for Royal family as Head of State - Cost £60 million

Crown Estates contribute £211.4 million to Government

Under this system Goverment is basically £151.4 million to the good.

Follow Sugarfoots advice and - I would say dump the civil list, make the monarchy independent and they can pay full-on tax like most normal people and be in charge of their own destiny. And you get this:

Government has to pay civil list to whoever becomes Head of State = £60 million

The now sacked Royal Family gets £211.4 million less this full on tax = £116.27 million

Government receives this full on tax = £95.13 million

Under this arrangement:
The Royal Family are better off - £116.27 million instead of the £60 million they received before.

The Goverment is far worse off - They get £95.13 million instead of the £211.4 million they received before and they still have to cough up the £60 million they did before because the country still has to have a Head of State.

Brilliant!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: GUEST,Sugarfoot Jack dumped
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 10:59 AM

Too late.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: GUEST,Sugarfoot Jack bereft of cookie for some rea
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 10:59 AM

That last post was I.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 10:37 AM

Prince Charles designed a lovely village in Dorset...and he's very in to nature, championing organic farming long before it became 'fashionable' He looks after the land, there are all sorts of things he's done which are good..

18 out of the 20 charities in here, are his idea:

The Prince's Charities

And of course, this has helped thousands of people get into work, run their own businesses..

The Prince's Trust



I feel sorry for Prince Charles at times. He was a shy and quiet little boy who needed his mother. He never got her, she had him 'for the country' Anne too. So they packed him off to the toughest boarding school going, far away from them, and kinda left him to it.
Then he was made to marry a woman he didn't love, because he wasn't allowed to marry the woman he DID love, she being Catholic, an' all, although why he didn't just renounce the throne and run off with her, who knows, but duty called, and after The Duke of York, he'd have had his grandmother to answer to if he had..and he was desperately fond of her. And the one person he truly loved as a young man growing up, and who was more of a father to him than his own, was blown to smithereens..I can still remember that day, August Bank Holiday Weekend...Lord Mountbatten, gone..and Charles's world grew a little darker..

So in a way, despite the unhappiness that Diane had to endure, which was deeply unfair, I'm glad that he's finally ended up with the woman he truly loves. I don't go a bundle on them, hate the hunting bit and other stuff, but I'd not wish ill on him. At base, I think he cares about his country very much, and cares about the planet too. He's been laughed at all his life, made fun of, never been given a chance really.

At least he stood up to his mother over lowering the flag for Diana, and he made sure she was brought home safely. He could have just walked away and left it all.

Is he really such a nasty, unpleasant man? Or is he a man who's never been given a chance to be liked or respected because everyone's been so busy making fun of him?



Prince Charles - A Modern Prince

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 10:15 AM

We have The Duchy of Cornwall biccies and jams all over the place down here in The West Country. Bit pricey though, but someone's buying them, obviously.

No, 1865, John. :0)

They were taken last March, 2008, so I was only 143 back then. I've gone 'orf rapidly since. 'Delayed Divorce Reaction' I think it's called.

I had a Parliamentarian almost knock me out at Reading once, you know. Came charging at me after the battle, whoooooooom! pushed me over, face down, then jumped on top of me. Geez, my head hit the ground with the biggest thump. He jumped off and started apologising, and I started mopping up the blood and cursing him, telling him he was taking this 'rape and pillage' bit, a bit tooooooo far! I threatened him with my hessian covered Robinson's Barley Water Bottle, which was filled with 'magic water' to bring the troops back to life. That got him worried! ;0)

Ah, happy days.. :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Stu
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 10:10 AM

"ZANULabour earlier last year wanted to sack Charles from his position as head of the Duchy of Cornwall, guess why?? He was making it too profitable, running it too efficientl"

I bet he doesn't run it personally. He has someone to put toothpaste on his Oral B.

"So in return for the civil purse (£60 million) the Government gets £211.4 million - I ask you once again whose getting the best of that deal?"

Good point and thanks for the clarification. I would say dump the civil list, make the monarchy independent and they can pay full-on tax like most normal people and be in charge of their own destiny.

Freedom for Tooting!

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:58 AM

1865 Lizzie? You look a bit younger in your phot's

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:55 AM

Taken from:

"The Crown Estates Annual Report 2008"

Chairman's Introduction The Crown Estate Website

"Over the last 12 months, The Crown Estate achieved tremendous financial results in difficult market conditions. I am delighted that we have returned £211.4 million to the Treasury, in the form of our net revenue surplus, an increase of 5.6% on the previous year. Capital values also rose to £7.3 billion, up 3.3% on the previous year."

So in return for the civil purse (£60 million) the Government gets £211.4 million - I ask you once again whose getting the best of that deal??

ZANULabour earlier last year wanted to sack Charles from his position as head of the Duchy of Cornwall, guess why?? He was making it too profitable, running it too efficiently - Pity the likes of Gordon of cartoon and his pal Darling could do the same for the country as a whole.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:34 AM

"I'll have two of them - make that with fries, and a chocolate drop Macflurry."

LOL

Hey, I've even got a Royal McDonald's connection here...Yup!

First time I *ever* went to a McDonalds, in about 1865, was in Windsor! It's right opposite the castle, still there too. I was a bit excited as they were so coooooool, in those days. I had a Big Mac and lurrrrrrved it!

I love Windsor too, really pretty town. WHY Mrs. Queen bought the castle though I've no idea, because she has planes flying over every few minutes which she could almost reach out and touch. Must have been a darn good estate agent who sold it to her! ;0)

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:30 AM

They banned women from 'the field' for a while, Jack, after she caught a 16 foot pike in the spleen. Very nasty.

It's pretty scary when you're in a 'hedgehog' too, if you'll pardon the expression! lol There you are, trapped in the middle of a circle of men with 16 ft pikes (ooer, missus), pikes all facing outwards, and you get charged by the enemy on horseback...horses are terrified, canon and musket firing off all around you, and nowhere to run...

Lizzie, former Camp Follower and adminstererererrrrr of water to the sick and needy soldiers.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:26 AM

well you've conviced me lizzy.

66p is a real bargain.

I'll have two of them - make that with fries, and a chocolate drop Macflurry.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Stu
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 08:50 AM

"Go and join The Sealed Knot, then you can chop off Charles I's head over and again, whilst beating up the Royalists. At least you could get your anger out in a different way. ;0)"

Er, I'm not such a fan of Oliver Cromwell either. I'm reading a very good book on the English Civil War at the moment by Susan Parnell. I have thought about the Sealed Knot, but apparently it's not difficult to break a rib or worse in a push of pike. Gerrard Winstanley has long been a personal hero of mine though.

However, getting rid of the monarchy is a great idea.

"Put the NHS back in charge of the medical staff far more and watch it start to bloom again."

I couldn't agree more.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 07:51 AM

Oh, and that 66pence doesn't go into the Queen's handbag, does it?

Every penny has to be accounted for.

Would she pay, out of her own money, to keep all the palaces and castles going, all the history and the pageantry? Of course she wouldn't. I've no doubt she'd be bankrupt in a very short space of time, but...I guess that would make you guys real happy.

And hey, you could all frame your 66 pennies in gold, or wear them as a necklace of triumph.

Go and join The Sealed Knot, then you can chop off Charles I's head over and again, whilst beating up the Royalists. At least you could get your anger out in a different way. ;0)

Oh, and the NHS has had MILLIONS and MILLIONS poured into it, and yet things are still so terribly wrong. That's not lack of money, but money being directed to the wrong places and decisions being made by people who've no idea what they're doing, or how hospitals should be run.   I know, I used to sit and listen to the guys I worked for, tearing themselves apart over how St. Bartholowmew's was being run, by people whose main interest was themselves, and 'making a point' rather than listening to doctors, nurses and surgeons. Put the NHS back in charge of the medical staff far more and watch it start to bloom again.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 07:41 AM

" 66p a year from each person "

>>Which amounts to £40 million year, which they don't need and could be far better spent helping home carers, buying drugs for the NHS or any number of far more worth causes.<<


Well, have your way then. Just don't forget to explain to the thousands whose very jobs and lives depend on that 66pence, that you've all decided what's best and you know all about every single one of the Royal family, and all of their future offspring, because you're all such experts..and caring, fair minded, kind people.

Cover over the gaping hole in the economy when the tourists go elsewhere and put yer gibbets and gallows up in Old London Town.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 06:55 AM

Can't those who actually WANT a Royal Family pay for them?
They're not exactly the National Health Service after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 06:41 AM

Do we flatten it all, uproot Kings and Queens from the past?

Nah! The ones of the present......wouldn't mind flattening and uprooting them!

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Stu
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 06:39 AM

" 66p a year from each person "

Which amounts to £40 million year, which they don't need and could be far better spent helping home carers, buying drugs for the NHS or any number of far more worth causes.

"For Gawd's sake...why don't you all go and start you're own country"

Don't need to - this is my country and it's mine as much as anyone else's. My ancestors have had to put up with this ridiculous system through the millennia and it's time we called a halt to it.

Time for a worker's republic! An elected house of Lords! Down with the Royal parasites!

But the gentry must come down, and the poor shall wear the crown.
Stand up now, Diggers all.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 06:23 AM

I've no idea where that information above comes from, but here in The Independent from last year, it states that the Royal Family and all that goes with it, the palaces, castles, jobs for so many people, etc..cost just 66p a year from each person

I don't think that's bad value, to be honest. Less than a price of a lottery ticket, and think what it encompasses. Jobs for hundreds, probably thousands, within the Royal Palaces, and without. A HUGE amount of revenue brought in through Tourism, heck, how would the tourists feel if Buck House was razed to the ground and replaced with Barrett Homes?

I mean, come on then, tell me what the plans are for this new England, this new Britain, this new United Kingdom, without the Royal Family? Do we get rid of ALL they have been associated with for centuries? Do we burn the palaces, the castles, the treasures, the paintings, the books, the furniture? Do we flatten it all, uproot Kings and Queens from the past, from Westminster Abbey and put them into Pauper's Graves, just to make a point that now WE are in charge?

The Royals have no power any more, they are merely figureheads. The Queen lost much respect over the way she treated Harry and William's mother, and for what she said about the 'annus horriblis' when Windsor Castle burnt down. Since that time, she's learnt that 'her people' aren't taking the freeloaders anymore.

They stated paying tax, and quite right too! They got rid of much of their free travel, the trains, planes etc..cut right back, everything was put under a microscope, the freeloaders amongst the Royals are now either cut out completely or paid an allowance by the Queen herself, and again, quite right too, because whilst she watched Windsor Castle burning down, many 'out here' were being turned out of their homes as they became repossessed. So she should jolly well use her own money at times.

Diane though, was different. You may loathe her as well, and I've no doubt many in here will, becasuse of their sentiments toward her son. But Diana reached out to everyone. She sat on the floor with them, hugged them, cuddled them, held their hands. She didn't care where people came from, if they had contagious diseases, were smelly or sick, if someone needed her, she touched them, held them.

She instilled that into her sons too. Many times they went to visit hostels for the homeless, the AIDS patients, all the time being taught by their mother, that there was another world out there, where people were hurting. And the people LOVED her for what she did. It wasn't just because they were 'brainwashed' by the media, not at all.

They saw, in Harry's mother, someone who was like them. She was battered from her parent's divorce, an unhappy child who grew into an unhappy and needy adult, who needed love desperately and who was able to give it in bucketloads. She got muddled, lost her way, found the man she so loved loved someone else, and the nightmares of her childhood came back, as her own children became those of a divorce too. Divorce deeply upsets children, believe me, I know. Harry and William had all that to contend with too, before their mother died, as well as all that came after, and is STILL coming after!

After she died many, MANY stories came out, along with video evidence, of Diana's private trips, on her own, to visit the 'ordinary' people. People she'd written to again in bucketloads, from Kensington Palace, people she'd come to know....And up she'd turn, unannounced, to have tea with them, in their council semi's....as happy as a lark to be treated as 'one of the family' to be around people who loved her for herself, who sensed that she needed them.

She married into a family where emotion is frowned upon, yet she was a very emotional woman. That's hard to deal with. The Royals were brought up to not show emotion. Diana stopped that. She went into the crowds, not caring about her safety, just wanting to reach out to others. She learnt a great deal from ordinary folk, and they took her to their hearts. She was human, she had weaknesses, she could manipulate the press when she wanted to, but to be honest, I don't blame her for doing that, because Charles's 'camp' also manipulated the press against her. Her life, at times, was desperately miserable and lonely, despite all the riches.

To be a warm person isolated within a cold place, is a hard thing.

She gave her sons a huge amount of love. She didn't want them sent away to boarding school either, and she made damn sure that she saw them as often as she could at weekends. She put 100% into those boys of hers. They'll not let her down. They haven't even begun to live their lives. Harry's still in the army, William's not that long out of University...you'd not be down the throats of your friend's sons in this way, so WHY are you doing this to them?

The use of the word 'Paki' was NOT used in malice. Please read that over and over and understand!!!!! It was a private name that Harry and others used for their mate, and it was used in a PRIAVATE video, which you ONLY got to see because some little shite stole it and sold it for loadsa money! And as I've said, who knows WHAT Harry's nicknames are, but I doubt he minds...

They're BLOKES in the ARMY, and Harry was being no different from the way I'm sure loads of his others mates are with and amongst each other, talking to one another without malice in friendly banter.

What do you want? Do you WANT him to be 'different' to all the other blokes in the army? Do you want him to be 'a Prince' at ALL times?
But, hang on, you don't WANT him to be a Prince, do you? You want that taken away from him.

So, he acts the same as all the others, and then, THEN you call him a little racist b*stard, even though no malice was given or received in a PRIVATE NICKNAME that has NOWT to do with you, or me, or the rest of the world, because it was private and NOT racially spat out!

For Gawd's sake...why don't you all go and start you're own country, with glowing gallows on every corner, to be used for every person who DARES step out of line of YOUR rules and regulations!

Harry's OK. He's still learning, he's still only young, and the fact he's no longer a boy, does not give anyone the right to be a bullying thug towards him, purely because they are so eaten up with hatred and jealousy.

Some of the comments I've seen in here have taken by breath away...and the irony is, of course, that 'Guest Alan' who bears an incredible resemblance to the earlier 'Guest Windsor Knot' let slip about the bebo account I had deleted. That told me that he was one of the two complete REAL racist shites that I went over to wallop on bebo, not only for the horrible things they've got on their pages about Mudcat and its posters, but also they're support of the BNP and their anti-Jewish mates and rantings.

And here are some of YOU agreeing with him!!!

There were only TWO people who knew about that bebo account, and they were the two racists I went over to have a go at...You have one of them in here, and you've all been so busy desperately trying to agree wtih him, and depict Diana's son as a racist, despite Harry's very friends telling you the EXACT opposite, that you've all been too blind to see you've been wound up by a real nasty piece of work!

I'll leave some of you to 'agree' with 'Guest Alan' now, in the knowledge of who you are actually agreeing WITH!

You couldn't make it up, you really couldn't!

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Stu
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 04:57 AM

"A young lad's life is what we're talking about here, not some cartoon character, but a young lad who has already lost his mother."

Which is a tragedy in itself, and what those boys have had to go through has been appalling and in many cases it's bang out of order they (or anyone else) should be treated like that.

But they're not boys anymore, they're well-educated (better than most), well-advised and intelligent men, and it's not a cartoon strip they're living in it's the real world and the real world is full of people for who the word 'Paki' is a pejorative and a term of abuse. Perhaps in the rarified atmosphere of Eton and Sandhurst the reality of life for those less fortunate than themselves in this country get overlooked and the idea the Royal Family can absolve themselves of responsibility for their faux-pas is nonsense and shouldn't be entertained.

I have no love for the arsewipe rags that pursue the Royal Family or anyone else for that matter, and it's depressing that so many in the country lap up the tabloid press in all it's forms.

But by the same token I don't care for the Royal Family for reasons I've already stated. They can look after themselves as they are filthy rich, and there are people far more deserving of reward for the part they play in community life and easing the suffering of others.

"The deal is the Exchequor gets the revenue from the Royal Estate last figures over £190 million and in exchange awards the "Civil Purse" about £60 million - You tell me SFB who's coming out ahead."

Teribus, I can't find this figure on the net, could you provide a ref please? According to wikipedia the Queen's tax details are voluntary and secret.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 04:38 AM

"So, what you mean then, Jim, is if anyone disagrees with you, then they are a racist?"
No - they are when they excuse or indulge in racism - like calling people Pakie or Towelhead, or putting on Nazi uniforms, or claiming such behaviour to be acceptable.
"Now you tell me Jim, how does the Royal family influence the career of an officer in the Army of Pakistan??? "
No, I am not unaware of who or what he is. Do you really think it would not affect a serving soldier's career to complain about the yobbish behaviour of a member of the British Royal Family?
As I said - the real issues in question are
Are 'Pakie, Towelhead, Sooty and Fuzzy-Wuzzie terms of racist abuse?
Were they used by Edward and other members of the family?
Is the wearing of a Nazi uniform, as a joke, or for any reason deeply offensive
Is this acceptable behaviour for members of the royal family, public figures - or anybody?
Please remove your noses from the royal fundament and address the questions.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 05:24 PM

I now get the distinct impression that Mr. Carroll is just lashing out blindly. Jim lad you really should do a little bit of research before planting your foot firmly in your mouth:

"(complaining about a member of the Royal family would have helped his army career no end, I'm sure)" - Yours I believe.

I do take it that you are blissfully unaware that HRH's supposed "victim" according to you is aserving officer in the armed forces of Pakistan. Now you tell me Jim, how does the Royal family influence the career of an officer in the Army of Pakistan???

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 04:38 PM

Alan, you are an anti ginger bigot!

To be prejudiced against a person because of their colouring is as offensive as racism.

Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - What a star!
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 18 Jan 09 - 03:52 PM

And here's some more...


Some in here will love the comments on some of these videos, because they're as vitriolic as some of the posts in here.

And *that* is what the power of the press can do. They can either turn you into a hero or a villain. Prince Harry made a stupid mistake going to a fancy dress party and for that they'll make sure they torture him for the rest of his days, as will some in here.

Leave the lad alone and go pick on someone your own size, preferably some that you actually KNOW!



And if you wonder why I get so *incensed* at those who throw the word 'racist' around like water, it's because I've had it thrown at me, so I know what it feels like. More than though, I also know what a small group of people, 'on a mission' can do to twist the minds of others against you. So I'll fight for Harry, and I'll fight for *anyone* else who people don't know personally, but who they throw mud at as if it's their right!

The comments in here, at times, have me rage!   A young lad's life is what we're talking about here, not some cartoon character, but a young lad who has already lost his mother.

How many of you walked behind your mother's coffin when you were just 12 years old, in full view of the public, not even being allowed to show emotion?????

How many of you have to live with your mother being dragged through dirt, year after year, and yet you have no right of reply!

Well, I too had my voice taken away by those who twisted and span in their own campaign, so again, I know a little of how it feels to have people tell total lies about, watch the words go out into the public domain and know there is NOTHING you can do about it, and I tell you this Jim, it stinks! It absolutely, 100% stinks.

So I have NO respect for people who leave deeply personal and foul comments about others on messageboards, thinking they're the bees knees. ONE person stood beside me and changed many minds back to the truth about me, and for that I will always be grateful, without that person I'd not be on this board either.....

Sometimes, people need others to fight for them, because they are unable to fight for themselves. Prince Harry may be part of the Royal Family, but he has no voice, he cannot lose it as you people can, nor say what he truly feels, EVER, because, as I said before, some little shite will be waiting to make his/her own fortune from that story too.

Now why not leave the lad alone and stop showing yourselves up! And apologies for any mistakes, but I'm so angry that I'm just going to post this!