QUEEN WILL NOT ATTEND WEDDING

Sky News ^ | February 22, 2005 | Staff

[MadIvan]

The Queen will not attend the wedding of Charles and Camilla, the couple have announced.

She will, however, attend the church blessing after the civil ceremony.

The couple are due to get married at the Guildhall in Windsor.

More Follows...

[Oztrich Boy]

She fired the prime minister of Australia about 20 years ago...a guy named Whitlam I think.

That's what socialists always say.

Reality, Whitlam was dismissed by only person with the constituional power to do so: The Governor General of Australia

The Queen of Australia has the power to dismiss the G-G, but not the PM.

And at the time, when the socialists suddenly developed monarchial devotion and were talking about appealing to to the Queen, word came unofficaily from Buck House, that Her Maj might not be that easy to locate quickly.

[ken5050]

Can I therefore assume that when you can, you will, and then promptly report back to us? (G)

As to my other question..can such a prospective bride exist?

[JewishRighter]

Since you seem well versed, I'll ask you: Why did Edward abdicate to marry what's her name? Wasn't he required to? Just trying to get the scoop on this Royal stuff.

[BlessedByLiberty]

Think Hollywood, think environmentalists, et al.

They have theirs and you shall not have yours.

[CitizenM]

I wonder when the baby is due?

[AnAmericanMother]

Wow, he's going to get married and didn't let his mama know?!?

Around here, that's grounds for a serious whuppin' from mama. (I can hear my grandmother's voice now - "Now you go into the yard and cut yourself a switch. And don't cut one of those little teeny ones . . . ")

[AnAmericanMother]

Yeah, but look what happened to William Rufus . . .

[Carolinamom]

What about the law (?) that their civil ceremony must be open to the public?

[windchime]

Fascinating thread. Thanks!

[joonbug]

Well then neither will I!

[Conservatrix]

[Conservatrix]

Very beautiful indeed.... Diana looks nothing like her "mum"...

[don-o]

I so do not give a damn about anything related to that bunch.

(Still appreciate the pings though. Almost all IS of interest.)

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

One word comes to mind whenever the subject of Charles and Camilla comes up: Tacky.

The word that comes to mind for me is: Adultery. (Both of them. All of them. Diana, too.)

[Sacajaweau]

We were talking about (I forgot his name) (The Duke of Windsor?) giving up the throne the other day because of the "rules". His love was divorced and a commoner, I believe. (I also forgot her name).

The bottom line will be that Charles WILL NOT get the throne unless Mama dies tomorrow.

I wonder what Charles' grandmother (Queen Mum) would say about this union. Liz's opinion means very little to me. She just controls the purse and gets to boss people around and not much more.

Perhaps Charles will wise up, go by SOME rules, and declare that Young William the future king.

[madison10]

That's it. King William V it is.

Regards, Ivan

Charles: The Man Who WON'T be king.

Good.

[Veto!]

Not to mention she was the choice of the entire world to be his queen. Frankly

Before long, Diana was scorned and detested for the shallow stupid person she turned out to be by many who could see beyond her makeup.

[AnAmericanMother]

Alice was not much of a looker either.

She wasn't all THAT bad. Considered a society beauty at the time.

[madison10]

Apparently Camilla did not take after her ancestress. Edward's paramour is rather pretty.

[t_skoz]

Am I the only one here who sees the fascination with monarchy as a celebration of human tyranny?

Those poor, stupid, "subjects"... In 2004 I find it hard to even pity them... gag me with a pitchfork!

Enjoy your shackles, dolts!