Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Her Majesty Has Been On The Throne For 50 Years!  
User currently offlineCarmy From Singapore, joined Oct 2001, 627 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1671 times:

Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth II by the Grace of God, Queen of this Realm and of Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith will celebrate her 50th year on the throne today, 6th of February 2002 A.D.

What a joyous day it shall be! I certainly hope celebrations will rival that of Her Majesty's Silver Jubilee! But of course, the Prime Minister isn't doing enough to publicise the Jubilee. Nonetheless, I'm sure it'll be a joyous Golden Jubilee year!

God save the Queen!



19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1645 times:

Just imagine how Prince Henry is celebrating!


Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineBanco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 53
Reply 2, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1639 times:

All I can say is that if our Liz has been on the throne for fifty years then it's the worst case of constipation I've ever come across! Big grin

(I suspect that might be a very British joke)



She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13157 posts, RR: 78
Reply 3, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1636 times:

Nothing to do with the PM, the Royal Family themselves are concerned about public apathy.
A lot has changed for them since the 1977 Silver Jubilee, none of it positive.
(I remember the street party we had then, in our more fragmented society now that's unimaginable, but maybe I'm wrong on that).


User currently offlineAirsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 34
Reply 4, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1634 times:

The concept of people reigning over others because of their birth is wrong. Sorry to be a spoilsport, but a hereditary monarchy (even a constitutional one) is a thing of the past.

And don´t use the "oh it´s only for representative reasons" argument. The main point is the economy of letting the hard working people feed a useless class of spoiled brats who have never worked a day in their lives. I don´t want to know how much Dutch taxpayer´s money was burned this weekend...

Cheers from a true Republican  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Daniel Smile


User currently offlineRyanb741 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 3221 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1633 times:

Actually, the UK Royals contribute a load of cash to the UK economy - both in form of taxes and also in the tourist money it brings in. Don't worry, they function very well as a business enterprise  Wink/being sarcastic


I used to think the brain is the most fascinating part of my body. But, hey, who is telling me that?
User currently offlineSeb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11475 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1629 times:

From a citizen of a former colony, Congratulations. No hard feelings about the whole 1776 thing, eh? Big grin


Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineAirsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 34
Reply 7, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1627 times:

Hmm, you get money from the state without working for it, you pay taxes to the state and the state is happy - sounds suspiciously like one of those get-rich-quick schemes, huh?

And about the tourists - ya, I´ve heard that argument before. But the UK is such a nice country, I can´t imagine a sane tourist comes here because of the current royals: they come because of monuments the royals of some centuries ago built.
And on the other hand: imagine how much productive time the British "Joe Sixpack" spends on following the royals and their scandals. If he´d work instead, the British GDP would get such a boost (it would probably be doubled  Wink/being sarcastic)

Daniel Smile


User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4295 posts, RR: 36
Reply 8, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1626 times:

Elizabeth always looks so sad and irritated, I don't believe she really enjoys her job. She must be in her mid 70s now, wouldn't her Golden Jubilee be a nice and graceful time to retire? Here in the Netherlands queens and kings retire around their 70th birthday, so their kids can get a life and be a parents to their kids and get the job when they're about 40. It would be a nightmare for us if Juliana, who is 92 and has Alzheimer and is hospitalized 24 hours a day, would still be Queen. Poor Charles might be dead before Elizabeth dies (if her health is as strong as her mothers, and why not, she looks like her).


nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineKROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1620 times:

Her Majesty gets the Royal because nobody get's more attention for doing absolutly nothing. Celebrate Tony Blare (Blair?), not a figure that is there just because.

User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1603 times:

>>Tony Blare<<

That is something when people incorrectly spell the names of famous leaders like like former President Kartar.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineKROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1592 times:

PanAm, you can get the Bozak. Did I not indicate I didn't know the exact spelling. My bad that I don't remember the spelling of every world leaders name. Shouldn't you be working up another useless thread right about now?

User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13157 posts, RR: 78
Reply 12, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1570 times:

If you were in the Queens's shoes, with her children, would you want them to take over before you snuffed it?
Looking at polling, admittedly not an exact science, the Royal's are on borrowed time.
People under 40 are much less positive about them, no great surge of republicanism either, but it's creeping up.
Amongst all age groups, the Queen is the biggest positive. Doing her job in an unpretentious and dutiful manner.
But British society has changed massively since her coronation, even the 1977 Jubilee celebrations now seem like events in another country. (Notwithstanding the Sex Pistols being at no.1 in the charts during the celebrations then!)


User currently offlineCapt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1566 times:

Have to say, my situation with regard to the Royals is one of apathy.....I'm not a 'republican', but neither am I a fan of the Royals.....they are not awfully relevant to most of our lives.

Not to sound disrespectful, but I won't be celebrating anything in her honour-come to think of it, I will most probably be working in the US this summer in any case!

Still, fills a few pages of Hello! magazine, which we all love!  Laugh out loud

Regards


User currently offlineKROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1560 times:

Ahhhh The Sex Pistols. Now they would deserve a celebration! "God Save the Queen".........

User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21391 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1546 times:

Congratulations!  Smile

I think as far as I can see from here she´s always done her best. And that wasn´t all that bad. There have been a few elected presidents who´d look bad by comparison.

Not that I would want any of the descendants of our former Hohenzollern emperor anywhere near our own state institutions.

But I think the fundamental thing is having a decent constitution (well, that too! Wink/being sarcastic); Who´s on duty at the formal top job is secondary as long as he or she´s performing decently.


User currently offlineAirlinelover From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 5580 posts, RR: 23
Reply 16, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1534 times:

What is the significance, besides shes old?? JOC? J/k.. No, Congrats to her!

Chris



Lets do some sexy math. We add you, subtract your clothes, divide your legs and multiply
User currently offlineCarmy From Singapore, joined Oct 2001, 627 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1500 times:

I'm sure HM will be there for many more years, and her descendents will inherit the throne for many more years to come. Why would Great Britain want a President for anyway? How odd it'd be!

God save the Queen, Great Britain, the Empire and the Commonwealth!  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineKROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1487 times:

The queen is nothing but something to look at. In this day and age, she has no relevance. I cannot fathom why people are so wrapped up in her, and the royals lives.

User currently offlineBanco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 53
Reply 19, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1484 times:

Correct KROC. I'm not remotely interested either, but of course, that is not a reason to get rid of the monarchy, hence it continues.

It doesn't do any harm, and does get the goggle-eyed tourists in. If they're mad enough to part with their money, then so be it.



She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Has God Punished The US For Not Supporting Israel? posted Wed Aug 31 2005 21:27:33 by Clickhappy
No Dressing On The Side For Pat posted Fri Apr 1 2005 17:17:27 by PROSA
On The Search For A Song posted Fri Mar 25 2005 06:48:35 by UAalltheway
More On The Oil For Food Scandal posted Thu Feb 3 2005 21:47:04 by Newark777
X-Mas And 03= Over, What's On The Agenda For 04? posted Thu Jan 1 2004 03:28:20 by Jkw777
Who Here Has Been Inside The Arctic Circle? posted Thu Sep 4 2003 22:04:15 by DeltaSFO
Hotmail Has A Limit On The No Of E-mails Sent? posted Wed Apr 9 2003 17:35:02 by United Airline
Anyone Been On The Eurostar? posted Mon Mar 3 2003 10:09:50 by QANTASFOREVER
How Long Have You Been On The Internet posted Mon Jan 6 2003 20:53:10 by Marcus
Now 7 On The Trot For Mufc posted Sun Jan 13 2002 17:02:13 by David_itl