Search results

because she was not a mullatto. Could that be It?

YOu would think that she would support union action even if she's not a member

I dont thiink anyting will improve that statue

I dont particularly want to, but i dont believe that he is guilty of anything more than unpleasant behavour

He certainly should have done so. It would have been very upsetting for teh queen in her Jubilee year and her last year alive to have this case going on. People often settle lawsuits even if they are not guilty because it will damage their repuation to have a case going on, or will cost them so...

where do you hear this rumour?

not really. I dont remember stuttering and stammering.

what do you really expect them to do? they are not professional talk show hosts, and I can't see what is the point of them having such programmes. all they have to offer is what they can tell us about the RF, which is stuff that many of us might prefer not to hear

I know charities can't always affor to be choosy, but I would nolt really want to work with someone who so nakedly made it clear that he didn't like being asked to help people, and who seems to have just put on a show of being friendly..

I think there is nothing wrong with his doing charity work but his books and interviews over the past 3 years have given the impression that he did not really enjoy that sort of work, that he felt like he was being used in having to do that sort of work and that his being a jolly friendly chap...

but how can anyone take Harry's smiles seriously wehn he told us he hated doig the royal duties.

Most unlikely.

If it happens, it happens. it wont be the end of the wrold.

yes but she's gone now. I think it would be nice to see a good statue of her now that she's dead and has reigned for 70 years.

If you dont want one in Australia dont have one.

It was suggested as a title for Winston Churchill, so there's nothing wrong with it, but usually royals have had soem title that has a connextion with the RF.

They may decide to stop giving younge children a dukedom, and I doubt if he would be given Duke of London.

we dont know if Louis will get a dukedom, by the time he's getting married. and there has never been a Duke of London, if he gets a title it will probalby be soemthing with a royal connextion.

I think she deserves a statue.

there is no Duke of London and the female of Duke is Duchess

it is a private matter, and nothing to do with their roles

why would ALbert deprive his son and ex girlfriend of their income?

I think the queen probalby did the right thing, as Burrell was and is unstable and might come out wiht some awful things in the witness box which would embarrass the boys... but I'd imagine that some sort of deal was struck, and he did not get all that he had made off with.

I would imagine that Burrell had to give back whatever he stole unless it was very difficult to retrieve it. As for Dianas jewels. her personal jewellery was left to her sons, for their wives, so it would not go to anyone else in her family.

It was silly but compared with today's scandals, pretty mild. But I would imagine Charles would not wnat to be in it.