BS: prince charles....

Subject: BS: prince charles....
From: tarheel
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 09:51 AM

I saw red when I heard about prince charles...of all the people on this earth...a miserable blue blood that couldnt run his own household and had the nerve to cheat and have a 20 yr affair going on with his whoremaiden and then has the nerve to marry her and parade her to all of the world as if we should all bow down.....and then for him to tell the US how to treat the murdering savages in the east. I cant even tell you how angry it made me. how dare he....tell America how to react. I with someone would throw him out of the country and tell him to go back to his castle where the other fossils live.
Isn't he the dope who traded Diana in for an old nag?
If anyone in the white House is stupid enough to grant any more than a courteous listen and send him on his way, they should fly back with him
Not to mention getting involved in the Serbia/Herzegovina/Balkans conflict. It was local
Muslims who were taking most of the asskicking. The Serbs and Croats were armed enough to
handle themselves. Still wonder what the actual reason for our involvement in that one is.

The Islamofascists have the oil, so we suck up to them. If they didn't have the oil, we would have crushed them a long time ago.
Look what is going on in France. If we keep it up, this will soon happen here in the USA.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: greg stephens
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 09:58 AM

So can we take it that broadly speaking you're not in favour of him?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:05 AM

had the nerve to cheat and have a 20 yr affair going on

Was he at a folk festival then

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,not a monarchist either
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:06 AM

while he's over there..


why dont y'all keep him !!!


cant we just sell the royal inbreed and all his family to Disney themepark corporation !?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:12 AM

More to the point, do we give a Flyin' Fuck what the colonials think of him? Not on your life. Americans aren't in a position to preach at anyone. He's no better and no worse than that Texan gobshite who lives in that Grace And Favour apartment in DC.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Peace
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:13 AM

I thought prince only had one name.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:24 AM

I'm bo monarchist but I fail to see what the Charles/Diana/Camilla buiness has to do with any views over what tarheel describes "as how to treat the murdering savages in the east".

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: SINSULL
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:29 AM

Let him who is without sin cast the first stone...isn't that what you believe Tarheel?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:31 AM

The Serbs and Croats were armed enough to handle themselves. Still wonder what the actual reason for our involvement in that one is.

Could be that when not actively engaged in wars of whatever genre, (milatary wars, War on Terrorism, War on Drugs etc) the powers that be in the US suffer an identity crisis.   Without war, would the US still be the same US we all know and love?

"...And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air, gave proof through the night that our flag was still there ....

...And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wiped out their foul footstep's pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave ...

....Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, for our cause it is just..."

and then for him to tell the US how to treat the murdering savages in the east.

Hmmm ... should be a piece of cake. Just kill 'em! Worked just fine for the Dodi dilemna, after all.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,any chance for a dig at the yanks
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:37 AM

whoremaiden !!!?????


doesn't that more aptly describe the young Diana

being sold on as breeding stock to the Royal Family ???



..anyway Camilla may have a face like a horses arse

but at least she dont have a backside the size of a barn

like most of your uncosmopolitan yank wives !!!

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: John Hardly
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:57 AM

I must admit that the notion of monarchy fails with me as well....though I think that the human yearning for a monachy must be coded into our genetics because, even when we claim to not want a monarchy, we still strive for one and/or act as though it is the default setting for all government. For instance...

...it is very likely that the USA --- we who fought a war to NOT be under a monarchy, and swear to ourselves that we are proudly a constitutional republic...

.....are going to have 28 consecutive years with either a Bush or a Clinton in our White House.

What is that if not "dynastic"?

But what I really am curious about with Prince Charles....

...in the UK, how ubiquitous is the organic produce that Prince Charles sells? Is it throughout the UK market and in direct competition with the farmers of the UK (and their produce)?

And if so, isn't there just the tiniest of insults to injury that Charles' family got rich -- beyond anyone's wildest imaginings -- on the backs of the working Englishman, and yet he takes that wealth, hires a bunch of workers to farm for him, puts that produce in a market competing against the average farmer who has what he as by the sweat of his brow....

....and then claims to "give the money away" that he gets from the farming...

.....and he expects and gets praised for his philanthropy??

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: artbrooks
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:58 AM

Well, Tar...you are certainly entitled to your opinion of Prince Charles and Camilla but I'm afraid that a lot of your information on other things just isn't correct.

You mentioned getting involved in the Serbia/Herzegovina/Balkans conflict? We (the US) really weren't. That was entirely a Blue Hat (UN) operation that the US had no control over and minimal involvement in. The UN policy of giving the Serbs back their guns when they wanted them and doing absolutely nothing to help the Bosnians (most, but not all, of whom were Muslim) when they were being dragged out and murdered (which is very different from taking most of the asskicking created a basic unwillingness on the part of many members of the US military to participate in UN operations. You noted that the Serbs and Croats were armed enough to handle themselves. Well, the Serbs certainly were, since they had the entire arsenal of the former Yugoslav Army at their disposal. But the US, and most of the rest of the world except a few Moslem nations, embargoed weapons shipments to the Croats and Bosnians, at lest at the beginning of the breakup war, and this contributed to the slaughter. You don't have this confused with Kosovo (a different part of the Balkans, where the military intervention was a NATO/US operation), do you?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 11:11 AM

I dunno, I was rather heartened to see that he went with the comfortable and stable old hag over the borderline...young is not always better than old...she's even quit smoking for the old git!

Aas for politics, I do think Charley should lend his money and his power to the good of the people of the world...like the Gates have done with the eradication of diseases like malaria. I like the loaning of small amounts to people to get businesses going as well. And STOP ALL WARS! Jimmy Carter said some brave things this morning on the telly!

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: greg stephens
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 11:36 AM

John Hardly: Charles' organic bacon etc is not to be viewed as unfair competition for other organic farmers. It is actually working as a fantastic promotional tool for the whole organic scene in the UK. Long may he continue to plug the ideas. he's been way ahead of most other potical leaders on this one.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 11:49 AM

That's what I like about some Christians- they are so forgiving! (Why do I feel that if I googled tarheel's diatribe, I'd find it ver batim somewhere on the internet?)

Prince Charles and the British monarchy are of no actual interest to me but I think they are in an impossible position, one that scarcely a one of us would be able to manage any better.

As for the Diana being traded in for his "whoremaiden", don't you think, Chuck, that if he had been allowed to marry the whoremaiden (you do have such a way with words!) Diana would never have been in the picture in the first place? She was a breeder, and a successful one at that. (Which put her also in an impossible place.)

I must say that I am grateful that I'm not a man (this time 'round) because Camilla's looks don't bother me. (You mean to say you think that Charles is prettier?) It seems like that most men react as though they were being asked to bed the woman and thus recoil in horror. (You might examine your christian soul, tar.)

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: katlaughing
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 12:01 PM

Leave the man be...he did not choose his station in life, no more than the rest of us. He is a fallible human being like the rest of us. I like some of his ideas and commend his efforts in caring about the environment, etc. I don't give a damn about his personal life, except to wish him peace and happiness, and don't believe people should pry into it. This world, today, is much too concerned with celebrities and their personal lives.

I am also suprised at Mudcat menfolk being so concerned with looks. I thought most valued the person within and did not judge purely on looks. Oops...there's another bubble burst.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,folkiedave
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 12:01 PM

Years ago we were at a campsite in France with a gang of mates and an equivalent gang of Dutch people. Every night a toad appeared at the campsite wash basin, and we christened the toad "Prince Charles".

The Dutch people couldn´t understand why so we explained that once it had been an ugly prince and now it was a beautiful toad.

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,G
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 12:04 PM

Well put, Ebbie!
And Tarhell, of what consequence is it of mine regarding the visit to the U.S.? None, of course.
I am an admirer of his with regard to his farming research.
And I will just bet that the older gal is a better lover than the youngster was, probably more faithful and no doubt better versed in the social graces in a natural manner.
I think being at the same dinner party with them would be a lifetime experience. Tar, just having a bad morning?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 12:06 PM

...and you also, Kat!

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 12:34 PM

And I will just bet that the older gal is a better lover than the youngster was, probably more faithful and no doubt better versed in the social graces in a natural manner.

Older hags are generally less energetic, problematic and demanding than younger ones, anyway. But "social graces" and "natural manner"? At first I saw no connection between the two, but then I remembered ...

The Graces (Grecian formula)

Hmmmm ... looks quite natural, after all. Not that estranged from the horse's derriere either!

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 12:34 PM

GUEST above is me, sorry ...

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,Francophile
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 12:55 PM

Look what is going on in France. If we keep it up, this will soon happen here in the USA. !!!?????


errrr.. what exactly is going on in France..?


looking cool & sexy and dressing chic ?

cooking with imagination and flair ?

drinking fine wines ?

speaking French ?


What !!!!!!????? are you warning us against ????

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: MMario
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 01:11 PM

perhaps he is talking about the civil disturbances that have been reported re: muslim women, traditional dress, public bans, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Rapparee
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 01:12 PM

My wife and I, one cold and rainy October night, were motoring through Balmoral. Chucky was there, but did he even offer us a nice cuppa?

It is to laugh! I would have done so to him, noooooooo, he was crass and boorish enough to ignore wet, cold, weary travelers.

Well, I cut him, let me tell you! Right out of my social circle. When I learned he was coming I didn't bother to send him an invitation to drop around, and should I meet him on the street I would cut him dead.

Humph.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 01:32 PM

Maybe he was just having a bad day, Rap. You know how that is. Try him again next trip.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: billybob
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 01:49 PM

No win situation!
If he speaks everyone says it is to trees!
If he keeps silent... he does not care!
Should have married camilla years ago but got sent off to sea in the Navy.
However if you look at all the work he does with The Princes trust for young under priviledged people he has achieved a great deal.One thing about the Royal Family, they cannot answer back.
Some of his opinions about architecture are so true, anyone been to London lately and seen the Gerkin!!!

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 02:02 PM

Sounds like a few of you should get laid really soon.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 03:26 PM

I'm glad Charles and Camilla were finally able to marry and I wish them well. The photos of the two portray a very happy middle-aged couple. They're both bright people, and Charles does have some good ideas in appropriate technology and environmental venues.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Raedwulf
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 03:39 PM

Actually, the Gherkin, as modern archi-torture goes, is not too bad. But too much much of modern AT is "monstrous carbuncles". Even if Charles is provably the world's biggest idiot, he's right about that much.

And Diana? Neurotic. Bulimic. They're both maladjusted by any "normal" standards. A match made in something close to hell for both of them, & neither's fault. Don't blame her, don't blame him. They'd probably both have been happier if he'd married Camilla in the 70's though. But history happened as it did, & perhaps, William, Harry & their descendants will be happier, as a result, than they might have been.

As for tarheel, we Yookers once had a king we called Lackland. You could easily be called Lackwit. Given the choice between your opinion and Charles', I'll listen to Charles 100 out of 100 even if I don't agree with him. This says nothing about Charles.

It says everything about you, though, you pathetic, limited, petty-minded, parochial little bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 04:36 PM

I don't have a big problem with the Prince. At least he is not gay.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 05:39 PM

Have you ever thought he may be king one day

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: GUEST,sorefingers
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 06:05 PM

lol @ Martin G, you hit the nail nearly on the head.

Live and let live. But there is still the issue of King G who had to abdicate to satisfy his desire, an American divorcee. Surely if a King had to do that, and, live in obscurity the rest of his life, should not this goose,ooops, gander do likewise?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: artbrooks
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 06:28 PM

Sorefingers, it was Edward VIII, not one of the Georges. December 11, 1936.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 06:56 PM

My we have got our knickers in a twist tarheel, haven't we?

I think having a Lord Emsworth as head of state has quite a lot going for it, really. Especially when it pisses off the occasional bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 07:09 PM

The Princes Trust THIS is just some of what this 'useless waste of space' [sic] is doing to help the youth of the UK. Not exactly parasitic behaviour is it?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: billybob
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 07:18 PM

More than Princess Tony and the precious Cherie!

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: greg stephens
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 07:41 PM

Monarchy is totally absurd. But just say you live in a monarchy, as far as I can see Charlie boy (and his current missus) are the absolutely ideal couple for the next in line. Sensible,`organic, treat the earth decently, none of that let your emotions hang out bollocks, a little respect for education, a lot of respect for religions that are not your own, what's wrong with that? What has republicanism as currently offered got to beat that?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: tarheel
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 07:54 PM

MY,MY!!! if it wasn't for folks like me and the threads i write...you folks would be BORED to DEATH!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: katlaughing
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 07:57 PM

Well put, greg!

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Rapparee
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 08:17 PM

Thought that you might be interested in the menu for the dinner the White House put on for Chucky & bride:

The menu for President Bush's dinner Wednesday for Britain's Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla, as released by the office of the first lady:

Celery Broth with Crispy Rock Shrimp

Newton Chardonnay "Unfiltered" 2002

Medallions of Buffalo Tenderloin
        
Roasted Corn

Wild Rice Pancakes

Glazed Parsnips and Young Carrots

Peter Michael Pinot Noir "Le Moulin Rouge" 2002
        
Mint Romaine Lettuce with Blood Orange Vinaigrette

Vermont Camembert Cheese and Spiced Walnuts

Petits Fours Cake

Chartreuse Ice Cream, Red and Green Grape Sauce

Iron Horse "Wedding Cuvee" 2002

-

Table settiing:

Clinton China

Vermeil flatware

Gold pintuck silk tablecloths

Sprays of white phaeleanopsis orchids with camellia foliage in the historic White House vermeil candelabras

I'm probably going to pick up a sandwich at McDonald's this evening, myself....

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 09:02 PM

Is the White House cook on a mission from God to kill them all?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 09:07 PM

artbrooks, you think it was the UN that bombed Belgrade? And you think the Serbs (who had fought with the Allies in WW2 and against Germany and Austria in WW1) had the entire arsenal of the former Yugoslav army at their disposal? If you don't know what you're talking about, better to keep quiet.

Oh, and whatever you might have imagined about the UN role, the greatest outside interference in the Balkans conflicts of 1992-95 came from the US, in the form of immense support to Croatia and its president, Franjo Tudjman. Presumably they liked his autocratic style, and the way he restored the symbols and currency of the catholic-fascist regime that had attempted to wipe out the Serbs in 1941-45.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 09:13 PM

They're eating on Clinton China !!! It's a secret Bush plot to subvert the royals!

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Peace
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 09:16 PM

"It's a secret Bush plot to subvert the royals!"

If it's Clinton china, better check to see who's eatin' whom under the table.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 09:28 PM

"Clinton China" - that sounds like some kind of euphemism. What are they planning to spring on the poor bloke and his old dutch?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: artbrooks
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 10:27 PM

Peter K: Belgrade was bombed by NATO forces as part of the operation in Kosovo. I never said that the UN was involved in this. This took place about seven years after the UN's abortive attempt to settle the war in the western part of the former Yugoslavia. The Yugoslav army was primarily a Serbian force, and it turned significant quantities of artillery and armor, as well as small arms, to the "partisans" of the Republika Srpska (the Bosnian Serb Republic). This force and Serbian regulars, who were formerly units of the Yugoslav Army, were responsible for an as yet unknown number of murders, mostly of Moslems, in Bosnia and Croatia. Peace was not imposed upon the combatants in the western Balkans until the US and NATO became involved.

Please feel free to correct me...and provide your sources.   Some facts about Bosnia may be found here.
I might also suggest Bosnia, A Short History and Kosovo, A Short History, both by Neil Malcolm (but neither is short) or Yugoslavia, Death of a Nation by Laura Silber. These are all suitable for both the serious historian and the lay reader.

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 11:02 PM

I don't care what they ate, tonight I went to the Red Lobster on Vestal Parkway and ate endless shrimp, every time I finished one plateful they refilled it with another plateful of my choice. I had Popcorn Shrimp, Scampi, Fried Shrimp, and Coconut Shrimp, I started with a frozen Margarita, and washed the meal down with Pinot Grigio, and finished with a cup of coffee, am now back in Owego drinking Dickel Bourbon [thanks Dick Greenhaus] over ice.
I can live like a future king too you know!!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Peace
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 11:06 PM

What, no GIANT SHRIMP?

Did you ever see the movie, "Forrest Gump"?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: Kaleea
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 11:19 PM

Jeepers! I thought I'd just take a bit of a peek at what 'Catters of the Realm were thinking about Chuckie & Camilla coming over--but golly, tempers certainly have flared.
    S'pose Pres. dubblepew thought this would improve his ratings?

Subject: RE: BS: prince charles....
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 11:26 PM

Part of the trade Kaleea, we went into Iraq with you, you had to take Chuck and Cammy for a visit.
Giok