Snook Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I'll apologise in advance for being unaware of Kate Middleton's title. Duchess of Cambridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossdog Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 So Blair and his (sort off) mate, that fat pillock, Brown have been given the royal finger. I think it's because the pair are soft, hateful gits who no bugger would want near them. What do you think? Why would anyone invite people that have brought Britain to it's knees.As far as Blair is concerned everyone knows that the missus is the equivalent of the anti-christ as far as royalty is concerned.Probably strikes a chord with most socialists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davyboy Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Why would anyone invite people that have brought Britain to it's knees.As far as Blair is concerned everyone knows that the missus is the equivalent of the anti-christ as far as royalty is concerned.Probably strikes a chord with most socialists. TOO BLOOMING TRUE. and I'm not a monarchist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Should soon be a truly momentous day for ALL!!! Will they have street parties? I will raise a pint for her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 as the labour party is the closest we have to a republican party and while in opposition labour mp's have on many occasions called for an end to the monarchy, im not surprised they were not invited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted April 29, 2011 Author Share Posted April 29, 2011 .... wouldn't that be, the BRIDE? Ah, that's a title. Her commoner mum and dad? How about David Allan? Gareth Thomas Ian Thorpe Keith Best Martyn Compton Rowan Atkinson And a pile of others who have a title or none in common with Blair and Brown. That about settles the title argument and puts my theory the two ex PM twits were ditched because they're bloody horrible and no bugger wants them around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callippo Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 we all know the President of the United States has got better things to do than attend these silly jamborees, but the lack of any truly senior American representative at the wedding is telling. The Obama administration just doesn't like Britain. The man's father was sympathetic to the Mau Maus. What else could you possibly expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 Is the Milk Snatcher going? Nope, Edward Short or Harold Wilson weren't invited. The biggest “milk snatchers” were Labour. In 1968 they took free school milk away from all 11 to 18 year olds. The Conservatives did not dub Harold Wilson a milk thief, but accepted this economy as part of the package to cut the excessive borrowing of that Labour government. No subsequent government, including the Labour governments of 1997 to 2010 thought free school milk worth reintroducing. Most people cannot remember that Edward Short was Education Secretary for most of 1968 (I looked it up) the year when the free milk was withdrawn, because no-one ran a campaign claiming he left us short of free milk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orbs Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 folks keep going on about getting rid of the royals, well if that happens just think what we would get in place, a president who would grant himself and is office millions far more than than the cost now and visitors wouldnt come to the country. A president called tony blair or gordon brown! Nightmare. the country would be deep in the brown stuff. But we would get rid of all the Lords. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 The selection process (the system which determined 'who gets an invitation and who does not') is almost certainly arcane. The 'star players' were allowed to issue invitations (albeit not unlimited numbers) to their friends. The families were invited. (Don't forget, the families are the ones doing the paying.) The politicians did the rest. Presumably (after an allowance for 'Peers of the Realm') the Ambassadors to the Court of St James headed the list. (They are, after all, the 'foreign princes'.) I do feel sorry for the Syrian Ambassador. [He is not the Syrian government, nor is he responsible for their behaviour. I thought that his comments (and I'm sure he was genuinely embarrassed) did him great credit.] It's amusing to note that the Syrian Ambassador got 'bumped' but Barak Hussein O'bama didn't even get invited.) It is, after all, a State Occasion. There will (no doubt) be Kings (who run Kingdoms) Emperors (if there are any empires around) Princes (who head principalities) Dukes (representing their Duchies) and hosts of 'The Great and the Good' Unfortunately (perhaps?) Mr Obama didn't make the grade. He's not alone. There are a host of other people who run countries who were not invited. There's a crude joke being doing the rounds for a long time now that goes something like: If an Emperor rules an Empire a King rules a Kingdom a Prince heads a Principality What do you call someone who leads a country?.. Anyway back to the OP -I hold no brief for either Blair or Brown but it did seem partisan and spiteful to include all and sundry but not those two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.