Jump to content

It's a boy


Batman

Recommended Posts

"Freedom" and "Anonymity" are fast becoming a myth for ordinary folks and will probably be virtually non-existent by the time this sprog reaches his 40th birthday.

 

 

They've been an illusion for some time now, tbh. There was an interesting programme about just that last weekend, on the World Service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a boy? OH magnificent. Oh I'm so proud to be British. Oh Britain! Where's my Union Jack gone? Britain! Ooh Britishness.... oh yay yaaaay

 

 

Damn, I hope they confiscate my passport so I never have to return to that dark ages pathetic excuse for a country.

 

What do you think of the Thai Royal Family? What is great is about this country is that you can call the King a tosser and not get locked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a boy? OH magnificent. Oh I'm so proud to be British. Oh Britain! Where's my Union Jack gone? Britain! Ooh Britishness.... oh yay yaaaay

 

 

Damn, I hope they confiscate my passport so I never have to return to that dark ages pathetic excuse for a country.

What a sad, pathetic attitude.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think of the Thai Royal Family? What is great is about this country is that you can call the King a tosser and not get locked up.

 

The other nice thing is that you can take a girl to bed with a reasonable expectation that "she" isn't sporting testicles. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for the monarchy if I'm in with a shout of being King.

 

Does anyone have a list of all the people I'd need to "displace" to become the monarch? It's how it was done in the old days, after all :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will join your army Paps for 3 districts in Surrey, a corner of Hampshire and enough land to graze my pigs in Summerset.

 

In exchange, I will stand at the back (preferably on a horse) next to you as we send the Welsh and the Irish in to battle. I will also call my first son Joffrey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will join your army Paps for 3 districts in Surrey, a corner of Hampshire and enough land to graze my pigs in Summerset.

 

In exchange, I will stand at the back (preferably on a horse) next to you as we send the Welsh and the Irish in to battle. I will also call my first son Joffrey.

 

Seems like a reasonable enough exchange. Under my reign, the capital will be moved to Liverpool, so these southern shires are of little interest to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will join your army Paps for 3 districts in Surrey, a corner of Hampshire and enough land to graze my pigs in Summerset.

 

In exchange, I will stand at the back (preferably on a horse) next to you as we send the Welsh and the Irish in to battle. I will also call my first son Joffrey.

 

OK so you guys are tied up in Blighty, I'll be working overseas on this project, think to get started I have to go have a chat with a lass about her Dragons ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's great news for the couple, well done.

Do I want to hear about it 24-7?

Not really.

Do I want to watch vacant untalented people who have no information, discussing nothing, and desperately filling hours of white noise television?

No.

 

Have I reached a worrying point where Russell Brand starts to make sense?

Yes.... :o

 

The butch and camp and annoying unfunny 'comedian' was ranting about how the public is being fobbed off with sugary news in simple form to distract them from the real stuff that is happening in this world.

The media gives people what they or their paymasters want to give them.

Meanwhile celebrities abuse kids unchallenged, and all kinds of other horrors go unreported for decades.

The beardy freak is right on this one.

 

calm down RB, you're funny on the PTS but this is all a bit ranty, your eyes are bulging, we're scared...

 

In the last few days there has been news of a rape victim jailed for sex outside of marriage, the church has continued to allow wholsale child-abuse, and bankers illegally made millions out of other people's misery.

But those stories are not the sort of things we should be concentrating on, they were shuffled to the back of the pack - will it be George, maybe Charles? Tweet us with your idea for a name and we might read it out back to you, for no reason at all - other than it being cheaper than employing real journalists.

 

 

So forget war and famine, rape camps and corruption, settle down for another cheery day of joyous royal baby celebration, with just enough false hype to bury bad news under.

It's what we need to keep us happy.

Cliched shallow tabloids and reality TV - that'll keep us all in line.

 

 

 

 

RB you old cynic...

 

Cynic?

'disbelief in the sincerity or goodness of human motives and actions'

 

 

Yep, guilty.

 

Though I should be more worried about having conversations with myself, not that I really exist beyond this forum...:scared:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's great news for the couple, well done.

Do I want to hear about it 24-7?

Not really.

Do I want to watch vacant untalented people who have no information, discussing nothing, and desperately filling hours of white noise television?

No.

 

Have I reached a worrying point where Russell Brand starts to make sense?

Yes.... :o

 

The butch and camp and annoying unfunny 'comedian' was ranting about how the public is being fobbed off with sugary news in simple form to distract them from the real stuff that is happening in this world.

The media gives people what they or their paymasters want to give them.

Meanwhile celebrities abuse kids unchallenged, and all kinds of other horrors go unreported for decades.

The beardy freak is right on this one.

 

calm down RB, you're funny on the PTS but this is all a bit ranty, your eyes are bulging, we're scared...

 

In the last few days there has been news of a rape victim jailed for sex outside of marriage, the church has continued to allow wholsale child-abuse, and bankers illegally made millions out of other people's misery.

But those stories are not the sort of things we should be concentrating on, they were shuffled to the back of the pack - will it be George, maybe Charles? Tweet us with your idea for a name and we might read it out back to you, for no reason at all - other than it being cheaper than employing real journalists.

 

 

So forget war and famine, rape camps and corruption, settle down for another cheery day of joyous royal baby celebration, with just enough false hype to bury bad news under.

It's what we need to keep us happy.

Cliched shallow tabloids and reality TV - that'll keep us all in line.

 

 

 

 

RB you old cynic...

 

Cynic?

'disbelief in the sincerity or goodness of human motives and actions'

 

 

Yep, guilty.

 

Though I should be more worried about having conversations with myself, not that I really exist beyond this forum...:scared:

 

Now, I'm no psychologist, but I think I detect a hint of cynicism here. :) How do you feel about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for the monarchy if I'm in with a shout of being King.

 

Does anyone have a list of all the people I'd need to "displace" to become the monarch? It's how it was done in the old days, after all :)

 

You are going to have to top about 10 million people (assuming you are a more well to do scouser, otherwise it will be more like 50 miliion). I would start by bombing the big posh events, like polo and the henley regatta. Then a couple of night clubs up mayfair way. That should fix the top end of the succession list. Then start on rugby and cricket events and the the odd tennis tournament. Chelsea flower show would get a couple.

 

That should get you up to about 9m in line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's great news for the couple, well done.

Do I want to hear about it 24-7?

Not really.

Do I want to watch vacant untalented people who have no information, discussing nothing, and desperately filling hours of white noise television?

No.

 

Have I reached a worrying point where Russell Brand starts to make sense?

Yes.... :o

 

The butch and camp and annoying unfunny 'comedian' was ranting about how the public is being fobbed off with sugary news in simple form to distract them from the real stuff that is happening in this world.

The media gives people what they or their paymasters want to give them.

Meanwhile celebrities abuse kids unchallenged, and all kinds of other horrors go unreported for decades.

The beardy freak is right on this one.

 

calm down RB, you're funny on the PTS but this is all a bit ranty, your eyes are bulging, we're scared...

 

In the last few days there has been news of a rape victim jailed for sex outside of marriage, the church has continued to allow wholsale child-abuse, and bankers illegally made millions out of other people's misery.

But those stories are not the sort of things we should be concentrating on, they were shuffled to the back of the pack - will it be George, maybe Charles? Tweet us with your idea for a name and we might read it out back to you, for no reason at all - other than it being cheaper than employing real journalists.

 

 

So forget war and famine, rape camps and corruption, settle down for another cheery day of joyous royal baby celebration, with just enough false hype to bury bad news under.

It's what we need to keep us happy.

Cliched shallow tabloids and reality TV - that'll keep us all in line.

 

 

 

 

RB you old cynic...

 

Cynic?

'disbelief in the sincerity or goodness of human motives and actions'

 

 

Yep, guilty.

 

Though I should be more worried about having conversations with myself, not that I really exist beyond this forum...:scared:

Maybe a lot of people enjoy watching the coverage though and don't want to hear about rape and famine all the time?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a lot of people enjoy watching the coverage though and don't want to hear about rape and famine all the time?

 

6.5 million watched the combined news specials last night, which is less than view an average episode of Eastenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a lot of people enjoy watching the coverage though and don't want to hear about rape and famine all the time?

 

But maybe just one TV channel's news output could be set aside for those of us who don't want to hear the latest news about who has wished the baby well, nor watch vox-pops with people who have camped out for a week outside the hospital ? Or maybe they could have a 'red button' republican option to suppress the "glad tidings" ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6.5 million watched the combined news specials last night, which is less than view an average episode of Eastenders.
Still a lot of people that want to watch it, fair play to them. Not like there aren't plenty of other things on other channels for people to watch if they so want.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think the Royal Family don't help to bring in vast sums of money into this country?

 

Is that what we base our democracy on, cost?

 

What if Roman Abramovich or Bill Gates paid billions into the treasury , shall we make them king? Lets sell it to the highest bidder as opposed to killing and maiming to decide which family "rule" over us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was driving oop norf late last night and the radio news bulletins seemed to be running a competition between each other to come up with the most pointless and irrelevant information possible. One station had some nutter call in just to say, "ooooh, they should call the baby Egbert hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" Which caused the presenter to also burst into hysterics. Another station informed me that a pizza delivery service in Manhattan was running a 30% discount to anyone who used the promo code, 'Royalbaby1' when ordering online.

 

Fascinating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that what we base our democracy on, cost?

 

What if Roman Abramovich or Bill Gates paid billions into the treasury , shall we make them king? Lets sell it to the highest bidder as opposed to killing and maiming to decide which family "rule" over us.

What the hell are you on about?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great news. Totally fantastic. I'm chuffed to bits we have a new parasite to stand up against a wall. Or we could behead him - that worked in France. Naturally I'd wait till he was an adult though - I don't want anyone accusing me of wanting to kill a baby!

 

On a serious note I suppose congratulations on a fairly common occurance are in order. I wonder if William will do better than his father and have more than one child?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzxAsO3vMLg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting to hear on the news that a recent poll found that only 17% favoured a Republic, pretty conclusive (proof that the country is populated by cap-doffing kneeling morons) I would say.

 

Fixed :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BBC one are now running a news feature about to much news coverage of the royal birth . Sorry beeb your just as guilty . Bill and his hoppo were hyping it up around the clock . So stop being hypocritical your just as bad as the rest of the media circus .

 

The female beeb reported kept saying everyone in the uk was anxiously waiting for news of the royal birth . Sorry not true . And I'm a royalist

 

For those that are moaning about all the news and live coverage over the birth switch channels like I did

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A survey of Chelsea Pensioners and Daily Express reading retired bank managers ?

 

Don't know mate but I think it was probably one from a reputable pollster.

 

Much as you and others don't like it there is a majority in support of the Monarchy. It doesn't mean there all sycophants, wetting themselves over the Royal birth dressed up in Union jacks waiting outside the Palace. Some people are just happy with what we have and cherish it. Personally the TV coverage has been (as normal) over the top, she's had a baby, it's a boy, let's move on. But if you don't like it, switch over.

 

And the old we are all born equal argument from the anti-monarchy guy on the Beeb last night, well no, none of us are born equal FFS, never have been and never will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting to hear on the news that a recent poll found that only 17% favoured a Republic, pretty conclusive I would say.

 

This figure even approximately fits with the figures Seumas Milne uses this morning in the Graun to support (WTF?) his demand for a republic.

 

Funny how the rest of the article rants on and on about democracy :lol:

 

Poor sod really is losing his sense of self-awareness with each passing week, as his articles go more and more for provoking response than having serious content :lol:

 

Really is modelling himself on that sneering tw*t Pilger now. And how amusing all this hectoring sounds when you examine his family and educational background :lol:

Edited by alpine_saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a republican but wish health and happiness to the child and hope the parents enjoy all the pleasure that I child brings.

 

I would be genuinely interested to find out how much of the "bringing up baby" they will actually do. I can't imagine for one minute that royal protocol will allow for anything other than a team of trained nanny's to wipe the royal arse when it has sh!t itself for the 8th time that day. I wonder how this will sit with Kate, being a pikey commoner and all, who probably expected that in her life she would do all the chores associated with having a baby before she started blowing the royal pipe at college? Or will it be more "relaxed" than that for the nippers early years, as the little ankle biter is whisked off to boarding school before he can even p1ss straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much as you and others don't like it there is a majority in support of the Monarchy.

 

TBH I'm not bothered by this, but I suspect that in reality if we had an honest referendum you would find a much larger minority voting republican. This result is as much to do with the timing, take the same poll after the next Royal scandal.

 

But if you don't like it, switch over.

 

Ah, but that's the problem - you can't avoid it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would call myself pro-royal but I don't think they should get as much money as they do. The main Royals are OK because the sense of tradition adds value to the UK brand but anyone outside the immediate family should have their wealth confiscated by the state, their homes turned into museums and put on one of Cameron's return to work schemes.

 

Tourists will visit the UK to see the queen etc but there are too many snobby rich ass-hole relatives and hangers on who add no value at all. Sarah Ferguson for one should be on the tills at a Tescos somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would call myself pro-royal but I don't think they should get as much money as they do. The main Royals are OK because the sense of tradition adds value to the UK brand but anyone outside the immediate family should have their wealth confiscated by the state, their homes turned into museums and put on one of Cameron's return to work schemes.

 

Tourists will visit the UK to see the queen etc but there are too many snobby rich ass-hole relatives and hangers on who add no value at all. Sarah Ferguson for one should be on the tills at a Tescos somewhere.

 

she doesn't get any money from the taxpayer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...