- the royal baby, diana and facebook…..
binners – Member
Whats become clear over the last week is that the royal family do actually perform an essential public service.
They give the terminally bewlidered, and hopelessly naive simpletons something to coo over. And temporarily distract the Daily Mail reading classes from spittle-flecked rants about illegal immigrant lesbian single mothers on benefits.
^^this!Posted 4 years ago
I had to deal with my mum telling me about the royal baby names last night, I kept pretending I didnt know what baby she was talking about but it didnt stop herjohnnystormSubscriber
George is a beautiful British name. A proper royal name too.
In Germany, the name has been popular since the Middle Ages, declining later use. In Britain, despite being St. George the patron of England since the fourteenth century, the name did not become popular until the eighteenth century following the accession of George I of Great Britain.
George 1st, the German king of England.
Not sure about Louis though. Who thought of that ffs ?
George 1st’s middle name was Louis (Well, he was Georg Ludwig to start off) and this chap might have something to do with it….Posted 4 years agoCougarSubscriber
Nice to have Kaesea back though.
Like all good conspiracy theories, I don’t think this is actually true. I can see a bunch of stuff relating to their site access and their profiles are different enough for me to believe they’re two distinct people.
Theoretically it’s possible that they are the same person and Kaesae has been very clever about it, but, well, I’ll leave calculating the likelyhood of him being clever about something as an exercise for the reader.Posted 4 years ago
I don’t know why the constant comparisons with Kaesae. Kaesae started highly popular threads and provoked challenging debates, however unusual some of his views were. He was clearly a different person. And yes Cougar, I think there was a reasonable possibility that Kaesae could be clever about something, but well done for including a little dig at him, despite the fact that he can’t defend himself. Still, Kaesae was constantly bullied and ridiculed on here, so at least your comment is in keeping with that spirit.Posted 4 years agokonabunnyMember
Film classification folk I assume
That’s not what the article says. Censors aren’t lawyers. More likely is that the lawyers acting for the producers said that certain sections bore a high risk under English defamation law and should be removed to stop everyone getting the bollocks sued off. Same as Kurt and Courtney, Biggie and Tupac etc.Posted 4 years agoTom_W1987Member
I would say calling a baby a **** is pretty uncalled for.
TBH though I think Charles should have encouraged his sons to be gay, so that at least he was actually as ecofriendly as he makes out to be.
Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘the royal baby, diana and facebook…..’ is closed to new replies.