Royal wedding alert.

Possibly the worst ever secret.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42137179

Can't wait, NOT.

It's about time all the stragglers were not given royal no eyes. I'm all for the queen and having a sovereign on the throne but do we really have to pay for anyone else.

The fact Harry is marrying a divorced American mixed race woman, who's been round the block, why should we have to pay for her.

About time apart from Charles and William and of course the queen, they were all stopped getting money, and made to work for a living.

It's official.

The tax payer doesn't actually fund them, they have a lot of land which belongs to the crown, the money from which goes to the treasury, who then gives enough back to fund the lifestyle of the family, money is also allocated to crown buildings to maintain them the, rest which is apparently a lot, stays with the treasury.

And now this boring tedium will grace the media ad nauseam

They will be living rent free at the State's expense at Kensington Palace.
You would have thought with his mum's inheritence, they could afford a tidy semi in Windsor.

I like the Royals enough to be happy for them

I couldn't care less but aren't they breaking one of their own rules by allowing a prince to marry a divorcee?

She probably isn't a virgin. And I bet he isn't either.
Chuck deflowered Diana way back. It was the done thing.

Eilzel wrote:I like the Royals enough to be happy for them

Me too, very happy for them both  

They wasn't allowed to marry showbiz, divorces, mixed race, Catholic, etc.

Prince Andrew loved Koo Stark, she was an actress so couldn't marry.

They say things have changed but Kate dated Wills 8 years before marrying. Harry hasn't been with her 18 months. Far to soon.

Also now tax payers will pay for a body guard for her while her xcon brother will get a free pass to the wedding.

It's wrong on all counts. If he wants her so much then come out of the royal freebies buy his own house they have enough money. She just is not royal material. I wonder how many men will sell their stories now, let's face it, she's been round the block lots of times. Nothing like Kate.

Eilzel wrote:I like the Royals enough to be happy for them

I love the queen, and have always said, Charles, Wills, his family are royal. We must get rid of the hangers on like all the cousins, aunts, uncles etc. All sponging off the tax payer.

Congratulations to them both.

A wedding announcement is always lovely.

Good to see too that both William and Harry found real love instead of having in foisted on them like their parents.

And who cares about her race, her virginity, her past? Isn’t that Harry's business? She’s also had her own successful career.

May they have a long, happy and healthy life together.

100 per cent agree Cass.

It's great when two people find happiness with each other, I just hope they are both sure and that she knows what she's getting into.
Maybe now Sarah and Andy can get back together, they are made for each other, even if you don't like them.
I don't care too much if she has a past, if she can do the job with grace, what does it matter. Princess Mary of Denmark? had a past as any young woman these days, yet she seems to have turned out to be a gracious member of their Royal Family and future Queen, in her case. Anyway I'm a sucker for ceremonials, especially Brit ones.

magica wrote:Can't wait, NOT.

It's about time all the stragglers were not given royal no eyes.  I'm all for the queen and having a sovereign on the throne but do we really have to pay for anyone else.

The fact Harry is marrying a divorced American mixed race woman, who's been round the block, why should we have to pay for her.

About time apart from Charles and William and of course the queen, they were all stopped getting money, and made to work for a living.

Woah mags, are you actually serious with that comment?

Vintage wrote:It's great when two people find happiness with each other, I just hope they are both sure and that she knows what she's getting into.
Maybe now Sarah and Andy can get back together, they are made for each other, even if you don't like them.
I don't care too much if she has a past, if she can do the job with grace, what does it matter. Princess Mary of Denmark? had a past as any young woman these days, yet she seems to have turned out to be a gracious member of their Royal Family and future Queen, in her case. Anyway I'm a sucker for ceremonials, especially Brit ones.

Nail, hammer, bang! The Brits have the Royals, America has Disneyland...or, the Grand Canyon, if you want to bring in the taxpayer.

It's a national symbol, which every nation has. Paris has the Tour de Eiffel and Lisbon has the Elevator de Santa Justa. Actually, the British have done rather well with their symbol. From horse shows, to Rwanda to land mines, they've gotten a big bang for their money. "Course, they had a lot to make up for, too.

But I lov the show. Keep it up.

Research compiled in 1997 by historians including Markle's great-uncle, Mike Markle, revealed that her paternal great-great-great-grandmother was New Hampshire landowner Mary Hussey Smith (1823–1908), a direct descendant of nobleman John Hussey, 1st Baron Hussey of Sleaford, who was beheaded in 1537 at the order of King Henry VIII. Through Lord Hussey, Markle is a descendant of King John. Markle is also a descendant of Captain Christopher Hussey, Esquire (d.1686) who was appointed in 1679 by King Charles II to govern the Royal Province of Hampton, New Hampshire. He was a Founding Father of Nantucket.

Markle is a distant relation of Prince Harry. Their common ancestors are Elizabeth Bowes (1505– c.1572) and her husband, Richard Bowes, son of Sir Ralph Bowes of Streatlam Castle and High Sheriff of County Durham – ancestors of Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother (née Bowes-Lyon).

Markle’s paternal grandfather, Gordon Arnold Markle, was descended from Abraham Merckel (1630–1698) of Alsace.

Markle's maternal great-great-great grandfather was a slave on Georgia plantations before being emancipated with the abolition of slavery in 1865


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan_Markle#Ancestry

eddie wrote:

magica wrote:Can't wait, NOT.

It's about time all the stragglers were not given royal no eyes.  I'm all for the queen and having a sovereign on the throne but do we really have to pay for anyone else.

The fact Harry is marrying a divorced American mixed race woman, who's been round the block, why should we have to pay for her.

About time apart from Charles and William and of course the queen, they were all stopped getting money, and made to work for a living.

Woah mags, are you actually serious with that comment?

Of course, are you saying she's not mixed race, divorced and had lots of boyfriends.

Because Mags is a racist?. She cannot bear the thought of Harry falling in love with a beautiful, intelligent, caring and talented woman who dared to be born of mixed race.
If it isnt racism, it is pure jealousy.

magica wrote:

eddie wrote:

Woah mags, are you actually serious with that comment?

Of course, are you saying she's not mixed race, divorced and had lots of boyfriends.  

No she is not mixed race, as there is only one race, the human race biologically.

She is mixed ethnically, just like every other single human being.

So what if she is divorced and had boyfriends

Angry Andy wrote:Because Mags is a racist?. She cannot bear the thought of Harry falling in love with a beautiful, intelligent, caring and talented woman who dared to be born of mixed race.
If it isnt racism, it is pure jealousy.

Oh I'm racist for stating the obvious, go figure lol what have I got to be jealous of her for.

See, no ones allowed opinions

magica wrote:

Angry Andy wrote:Because Mags is a racist?. She cannot bear the thought of Harry falling in love with a beautiful, intelligent, caring and talented woman who dared to be born of mixed race.
If it isnt racism, it is pure jealousy.

Oh I'm racist for stating the obvious, go figure lol what have I got to be jealous of her for.

See, no ones allowed opinions

I would not say you were racist, just lack any understanding of biology

Races in humans are social constructs. They are not something biological.

Like I say, we are all mixed ethnically

You sound very sour, bitter and jealous.
I think they should pay for their own house rather than the taxpayer, but I wish them every happiness.They look to be a delightful couple, made for each other.

Angry Andy wrote:You sound very sour, bitter and jealous.
I think they should pay for their own house rather than the taxpayer,  but I wish them every happiness.They look to be a delightful  couple, made for each other.

Think what you like, how would I be jealous I'm twice her age ffs. You know what, your opinion of me don't matter.

Didge wrote:Research compiled in 1997 by historians including Markle's great-uncle, Mike Markle, revealed that her paternal great-great-great-grandmother was New Hampshire landowner Mary Hussey Smith (1823–1908), a direct descendant of nobleman John Hussey, 1st Baron Hussey of Sleaford, who was beheaded in 1537 at the order of King Henry VIII. Through Lord Hussey, Markle is a descendant of King John. Markle is also a descendant of Captain Christopher Hussey, Esquire (d.1686) who was appointed in 1679 by King Charles II to govern the Royal Province of Hampton, New Hampshire. He was a Founding Father of Nantucket.

Markle is a distant relation of Prince Harry. Their common ancestors are Elizabeth Bowes (1505– c.1572) and her husband, Richard Bowes, son of Sir Ralph Bowes of Streatlam Castle and High Sheriff of County Durham – ancestors of Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother (née Bowes-Lyon).

Markle’s paternal grandfather, Gordon Arnold Markle, was descended from Abraham Merckel (1630–1698) of Alsace.

Markle's maternal great-great-great grandfather was a slave on Georgia plantations before being emancipated with the abolition of slavery in 1865

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan_Markle#Ancestry

Sooo? Why didn't they make her the Duchess of Hussy?

Are you Indian , Pakistani or Muslim, Mags?
Because you seem to want to pick who Harry marries. Does he get a say?

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Research compiled in 1997 by historians including Markle's great-uncle, Mike Markle, revealed that her paternal great-great-great-grandmother was New Hampshire landowner Mary Hussey Smith (1823–1908), a direct descendant of nobleman John Hussey, 1st Baron Hussey of Sleaford, who was beheaded in 1537 at the order of King Henry VIII. Through Lord Hussey, Markle is a descendant of King John. Markle is also a descendant of Captain Christopher Hussey, Esquire (d.1686) who was appointed in 1679 by King Charles II to govern the Royal Province of Hampton, New Hampshire. He was a Founding Father of Nantucket.

Markle is a distant relation of Prince Harry. Their common ancestors are Elizabeth Bowes (1505– c.1572) and her husband, Richard Bowes, son of Sir Ralph Bowes of Streatlam Castle and High Sheriff of County Durham – ancestors of Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother (née Bowes-Lyon).

Markle’s paternal grandfather, Gordon Arnold Markle, was descended from Abraham Merckel (1630–1698) of Alsace.

Markle's maternal great-great-great grandfather was a slave on Georgia plantations before being emancipated with the abolition of slavery in 1865

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan_Markle#Ancestry

Sooo?  Why didn't they make her the Duchess of Hussy?

I am showing she has Royal ancestry

What is wrong in pointing that out?

magica wrote:They wasn't allowed to marry showbiz, divorces, mixed race, Catholic, etc.

Prince Andrew loved Koo Stark, she was an actress so couldn't marry.

New rules on royal succession came into force in 2015, allowing members of the Royal Family to marry a Roman Catholic and become king or queen.

Ms Markle was previously married, but the Church of England agreed in 2002 that divorced people could remarry in church at the discretion of the priest.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Sooo?  Why didn't they make her the Duchess of Hussy?

I am showing she has Royal ancestry

What is wrong in pointing that out?

No, I mean...excellent work. Gd coverage. But why do they speculate she will be Duchess of Wessex or whatever, when she already has the Hussy name?

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


I am showing she has Royal ancestry

What is wrong in pointing that out?

No, I mean...excellent work.  Gd coverage.  But why do they speculate she will be Duchess of Wessex or whatever, when she already has the Hussy name?

Its an interesting point, maybe this can help

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/27/meghan-markles-title-expected-duchess-sussex/

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

No, I mean...excellent work.  Gd coverage.  But why do they speculate she will be Duchess of Wessex or whatever, when she already has the Hussy name?

Its an interesting point, maybe this can help

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/27/meghan-markles-title-expected-duchess-sussex/

The Duchess of Clarence would be great. Good Yorkish name, and all that!

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


Its an interesting point, maybe this can help

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/27/meghan-markles-title-expected-duchess-sussex/

The Duchess of Clarence would be great.  Good Yorkish name, and all that!

They should find a good sounding long Welsh place name, just to make the media struggle every time they say it.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

The Duchess of Clarence would be great.  Good Yorkish name, and all that!

They should find a good sounding long Welsh place name, just to make the media struggle every time they say it.

Revenge of the dragon!

you mean like

"Llanfair­pwllgwyngyll­gogery­chwyrn­drobwll­llan­tysilio­gogo­goch."

Lord Foul wrote:you mean like

"Llanfair­pwllgwyngyll­gogery­chwyrn­drobwll­llan­tysilio­gogo­goch."

Excellent, "The Duchess of Llanfair­pwllgwyngyll­gogery­chwyrn­drobwll­llan­tysilio­gogo­goch"...

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


They should find a good sounding long Welsh place name, just to make the media struggle every time they say it.

  Revenge of the dragon!

Very clever....

pronounced

WOW!  An a black man, too.  Can you do that smelly?

so what....he's a cunning linguist.......

Lord Foul wrote:so what....he's a cunning linguist.......

Ya, Miss Moneypenny tol' me.

oh shit quill....that was clever......

eddie wrote:I couldn't care less but aren't they breaking one of their own rules by allowing a prince to marry a divorcee?

suddenly a traditionalist now are we??

Angry Andy wrote:Are you Indian , Pakistani or Muslim, Mags?
Because you seem to want to pick who Harry marries. Does he get a say?

Racist alert

magica wrote:

Angry Andy wrote:Are you Indian , Pakistani or Muslim, Mags?
Because you seem to want to pick who Harry marries. Does he get a say?

Racist alert

well strangely enough for a L/Wer, he's managed to give the Jews a rest this time

Mags wants to choose who Harry marries. That is called an arranged marriage in many cultures. .
The same cultures Mags appears to dislike intensly. She appears to be confused.com.

I've always liked him. Now, I find her quite attractive.

Angry Andy wrote:Mags wants to choose who Harry marries. That is called an arranged marriage in many cultures. .
The same cultures Mags appears to dislike intensly.  She appears to be confused.com.

How am I picking who he should marry, because I stated the obvious with Meghan.

Your confused, you have me mixed up with someone who gives a damn.



Go and troll someone else