Royal Wedding,

Reply Subscribe

Page 12 of 14

« First

Thread Tools

04-30-2011, 03:25 PM

#111

sueisallaboutquilts

Power Poster

Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Ohio

Posts: 17,068

Xylie55, I really hope they delete your post. Your nastiness is inexcusable.

04-30-2011, 03:33 PM

#112

yonnikka

Senior Member

Join Date: Oct 2010

Location: Southern Michigan

Posts: 732

I woke up at 3:30 a.m. and watched it through. Main coverage was Diane Sawyer on abc network. She did a good job, had an enthusiastic team, with a lot of sensitive mentioning of Diana, lots of film coverage of Diana also, the good, the sad, and the sentimental. I was very impressed with Diana, and know she is proud of her handsome son.

04-30-2011, 04:09 PM

#113

Monika

Super Member

Join Date: Dec 2009

Location: Sacramento, CA

Posts: 2,033

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xylie55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Somerset Val

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xylie55

I don't begrudge them their day,but all the hoopla and window dressing they put on.Like Will married a commoner,not a royal.As did Charles.Well,Diana was a cousin of sorts,and this last century they had to get some new blood in the family.Look at Charles.He's so imbred,he's downright ugly and that horse face he's with now,suits him to a tea.Diana was too pretty for him anyway.He's better off sticking with his own kind.She could eat corn thru a picket fence.And he could too.That's probably what they do after riding all day.

I don't think much of your comments, in fact, I think that most British people would find them very offensive. We all thought that Camilla looked really lovely, and Charles showed a very sensitive side as he lifted up the little bridesmaid so that she could see over the balcony.
I don't believe this forum is the place to slag off people who have no right of reply. Please keep your thoughts to yourself if you cannot find something good to say about others.

I'm so sorry if you didn't know that they were imbred.Sometimes the truth cuts us like a knife doesn't it.The british already knew it.They talked about it yesterday quite a bit on the news how they got 'new' blood in the line just starting this century.But what they didn't add was why they had to do it.Well that is why.The British, still have not got over Camilla,and what she and Charles did to Diana.Maybe you were not here then,so didn't know that.But ya,the Royals are imbred,and the line should have had new blood in it centuries ago.Sorry if the truth affended you,but the truth is the truth. "have no right of reply"? ."Slag off?"(what the heck does that mean)LOL," "Keep my thoughts to myself". If we did that,there would not be a forum.What do you think a forum is?

While a forum is about sharing thoughts & ideas, it is not about insulting others. I believe the word you were looking for is INBRED, not IMBRED and to use it when referring to people as opposed to animals is insulting.

Here is a small bit of history for the history challanged among us: Prince Philip was from Greece.....Queen Elizabeth's grandmother was Danish....

Where is the evidence that the Royal Family has not married outside of their own genetic pool? I can cite numerous examples, like the above, going back a thousand years that proves the opposite.

04-30-2011, 04:21 PM

#114

sarahelloyd

Senior Member

Join Date: Oct 2009

Location: Romsey, Hants, UK

Posts: 754

If anyone is interested there is a lovely item about how the lace was applied to the dress. It's on bbc.co.uk/news then watch the watch/listen box, it is fascinating!

04-30-2011, 05:09 PM

#115

ljorange

Senior Member

Join Date: Nov 2010

Location: Seattle

Posts: 689

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xylie55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Somerset Val

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xylie55

I don't think we Americans should be talking about inbreeding...have you never seen "Deliverance"?

04-30-2011, 05:21 PM

#116

Radiana

Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2011

Posts: 502

I'm sorry but that's what I liked about this forum it seemed so friendly and accepting. Why are there hateful comments just for the sake of being nasty. I disagree with what one of the posters said about because it's a forum she can say anything she wants. No matter what she thinks of the wedding or royal family she could keep it to herself and allow the rest of us to celebrate. If you can't celebrate with us don't come to the party.

04-30-2011, 06:14 PM

#117

sueisallaboutquilts

Power Poster

Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Ohio

Posts: 17,068

Radiana, I found that post you're referring to very offensive also and I don't have a drop of British blood.

Nobody has the right to make such nasty comments about anyone, no matter that this is a public forum.

Common decency is called for and I guess it's lacking in some, but thankfully not the masses.

I liked your post a lot, thanks :)

04-30-2011, 09:37 PM

#118

bodie358

Senior Member

Join Date: May 2008

Location: California

Posts: 401

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radiana

Why is money always said to be wasted on royal weddings? It's not like they happen every six months. The shear fact that there is a special day with beauty and pagentry and romance especially in this crazy world of ours is worth the 32 million. We in this country spend three times as much on Presidential Inaugurations.

I agree. Furthermore, the royals do nothing but charity work. They don't just lay around the castle all day.

04-30-2011, 09:43 PM

#119

bodie358

Senior Member

Join Date: May 2008

Location: California

Posts: 401

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xylie55

My mother was British and I take offense at your rude remarks. And, for your information, you might want to research before you spout off. Diana was not a commonor, her father was an earl. You should consider apologizing for your uncalled-for, low-class comments. You, my dear, are much more "common" than anyone you mentioned.