dead Queen Elizabeth II

[Toast 16,155]

My idea that it's actually a job comes from some bit I read about the results of a UK census in the late 19th century. It totalled all people by occupation, including one entry: "queen 1". It did not include an entry: "prince of wales 1".

 

Just for fun, I looked up the future Edward VII in the 1871 census. His name is given as "HRH Prince of Wales", while his occupation is described as simply "Prince".

[Bibliogryphon 9,592]

 

 

 

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

 

With every passing year with his mother alive the chances of that happening grow slimmer. Should he survive her, his reign will be short.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Certainly less than 10 years.

 

 

Interesting to think about... Yes, Victoria's son also reigned for less than 10 years, but why should Charles have the same fate? He surely has good genes, so what keeps him from reaching the same age as his parents? Yet, I do have the same feeling... Women in general live longer than men, but why? Is it evolution (female animals care for their children, and the lifespan of male animals is often much shorter), or is it the physical work that men do (or used to do), or male neglect of healthy living? Certainly, reasons two and three imply that Charles' life shouldn't be significantly shorter than his mum's.

 

Simple equation

 

Waking up next to Camilla everyday or Death?

 

Take your choice....

[Phantom 2,536]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

 

With every passing year with his mother alive the chances of that happening grow slimmer. Should he survive her, his reign will be short.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Certainly less than 10 years.

 

 

Interesting to think about... Yes, Victoria's son also reigned for less than 10 years, but why should Charles have the same fate? He surely has good genes, so what keeps him from reaching the same age as his parents? Yet, I do have the same feeling... Women in general live longer than men, but why? Is it evolution (female animals care for their children, and the lifespan of male animals is often much shorter), or is it the physical work that men do (or used to do), or male neglect of healthy living? Certainly, reasons two and three imply that Charles' life shouldn't be significantly shorter than his mum's.

 

Simple equation

 

Waking up next to Camilla everyday or Death?

 

Take your choice....

 

She's a handsome woman is that Camilla.

[Bibliogryphon 9,592]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

 

With every passing year with his mother alive the chances of that happening grow slimmer. Should he survive her, his reign will be short.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Certainly less than 10 years.

 

 

Interesting to think about... Yes, Victoria's son also reigned for less than 10 years, but why should Charles have the same fate? He surely has good genes, so what keeps him from reaching the same age as his parents? Yet, I do have the same feeling... Women in general live longer than men, but why? Is it evolution (female animals care for their children, and the lifespan of male animals is often much shorter), or is it the physical work that men do (or used to do), or male neglect of healthy living? Certainly, reasons two and three imply that Charles' life shouldn't be significantly shorter than his mum's.

 

Simple equation

 

Waking up next to Camilla everyday or Death?

 

Take your choice....

 

She's a handsome woman is that Camilla.

 

It is very progressive to allow people in such institutions access to the internet

[maryportfuncity 10,658]

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Aren't you supposed to be on t'radio now or summat MPFC?

 

 

It was the new guy (who now alternates shows with me) last Sunday, but anyone presenting a show at that time is tempted to pre-record them instead (which is what we both do).

[Phantom 2,536]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

 

With every passing year with his mother alive the chances of that happening grow slimmer. Should he survive her, his reign will be short.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Certainly less than 10 years.

 

 

Interesting to think about... Yes, Victoria's son also reigned for less than 10 years, but why should Charles have the same fate? He surely has good genes, so what keeps him from reaching the same age as his parents? Yet, I do have the same feeling... Women in general live longer than men, but why? Is it evolution (female animals care for their children, and the lifespan of male animals is often much shorter), or is it the physical work that men do (or used to do), or male neglect of healthy living? Certainly, reasons two and three imply that Charles' life shouldn't be significantly shorter than his mum's.

 

Simple equation

 

Waking up next to Camilla everyday or Death?

 

Take your choice....

 

She's a handsome woman is that Camilla.

 

It is very progressive to allow people in such institutions access to the internet

 

You do realize I used the term "handsome"?

[Bibliogryphon 9,592]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

 

With every passing year with his mother alive the chances of that happening grow slimmer. Should he survive her, his reign will be short.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Certainly less than 10 years.

 

 

Interesting to think about... Yes, Victoria's son also reigned for less than 10 years, but why should Charles have the same fate? He surely has good genes, so what keeps him from reaching the same age as his parents? Yet, I do have the same feeling... Women in general live longer than men, but why? Is it evolution (female animals care for their children, and the lifespan of male animals is often much shorter), or is it the physical work that men do (or used to do), or male neglect of healthy living? Certainly, reasons two and three imply that Charles' life shouldn't be significantly shorter than his mum's.

 

Simple equation

 

Waking up next to Camilla everyday or Death?

 

Take your choice....

 

She's a handsome woman is that Camilla.

 

It is very progressive to allow people in such institutions access to the internet

 

You do realize I used the term "handsome"?

 

It is such a drag trying to keep up somedays

[RadGuy 1,614]

I wonder if the cycle of parents-outliving-children will continue in the British Royal Family.

 

Mary of Teck (1867-1953) outlived her son, King George VI (1896-1952).

Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon (1900-2002) outlived her daughter, Princess Margaret (1930-2002).

 

Will Queen Elizabeth outlive Prince Charles (or another one of her children)?

 

P.S. There were cases of parents outliving children in older generations too, but I though I shouldn't list them because that was so long ago it was normal for, like, 50% of the population to die before their 30th birthday. (Not a real statistic, don't get butthurt).

[YoungWillz 21,076]

It's the 62nd anniversary of her coronation today. Still no sign of weakening, she'll definitely become our longest ever reigning monarch.

[Windsor 2,233]

She's doing alright, but the Duke of Edinburgh was looking a bit shaky at the State Opening of Parliament. Seemed to be using his sword as a walking cane (not a euphemism).

[themaninblack 2,112]

She's doing alright, but the Duke of Edinburgh was looking a bit shaky at the State Opening of Parliament. Seemed to be using his sword as a walking cane (not a euphemism).

 

Yeah, I noticed that. I'd be very surprised if the Duke is around in the next "new" parliament in 2020...

[Deathray 2,941]

The queen will live to at least 110. Outliving Charles and Philip and possibly Andrew.

[gcreptile 10,979]

A tweet almost officially kills her:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/03/queens-health-bbc-tweet-global-news-alert

[mijkediablo 79]

Loath though I am to post anything from the S*n, thought this might be of interest.

 

 

This from the BBC:

 

The black and white footage, which lasts about 17 seconds, shows the Queen playing with a dog on the lawn in the gardens of Balmoral, the Sun claims.

The Queen Mother then raises her arm in what looks like a Nazi salute, and after glancing towards her mother the Queen mimics the gesture. Prince Edward, the future Edward VIII, is also seen raising his arm.

 

Could Queen Elizardbreath II's grip on the national media be waning at last? Or is this one last act of vengeance from Murdoch before he carks it?

[maryportfuncity 10,658]

Aw FFS, what's the fuss, she isn't even trying

 

 

[GossipGabe 333]

Loath though I am to post anything from the S*n, thought this might be of interest.

 

 

This from the BBC:

 

 

The black and white footage, which lasts about 17 seconds, shows the Queen playing with a dog on the lawn in the gardens of Balmoral, the Sun claims.

 

 

 

The Queen Mother then raises her arm in what looks like a Nazi salute, and after glancing towards her mother the Queen mimics the gesture. Prince Edward, the future Edward VIII, is also seen raising his arm.

 

Could Queen Elizardbreath II's grip on the national media be waning at last? Or is this one last act of vengeance from Murdoch before he carks it?

This is hilarious stuff. What it really proves again is that Britain (and the world) was lucky that Ed VIII reigned for less than a year... Lizzy was just seven, so she can't be blamed for the gesture, but I'm surprised that her mum was teaching her a nazi salute. Naughty naughty Queen Mum...

 

If I had been a member of the Royal Family, I would have destroyed the original footage ages ago, but definitely no later than 1940. It's so compromising, and it could have damaged the Royal Family's reputation if someone had published it in the early 1940s. Then we would talk about the United Republick...

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

Loath though I am to post anything from the S*n, thought this might be of interest.

 

 

This from the BBC:

 

 

The black and white footage, which lasts about 17 seconds, shows the Queen playing with a dog on the lawn in the gardens of Balmoral, the Sun claims.

 

 

The Queen Mother then raises her arm in what looks like a Nazi salute, and after glancing towards her mother the Queen mimics the gesture. Prince Edward, the future Edward VIII, is also seen raising his arm.

 

Could Queen Elizardbreath II's grip on the national media be waning at last? Or is this one last act of vengeance from Murdoch before he carks it?

What a load of tosh this is. Apparently, because it concerns Prince Edward, The Sun considers this historically significant. What? That the Queen's uncle and former King had Nazi sympathies? What's new about that? They sent him halfway across the world to isolate him from that. Does the Queen have Nazi sympathies? Did her parents have Nazi sympathies? If the video is indeed from 1933-34, it is only of vague cultural relevance. Hitler is just a curious man in charge of Germany, all the horrors are yet to come. It's a crude way for The Sun to sell some papers and embarrass the Queen and with everything else going on in the world you'd think there'd be more important things to talk about.

[the_engineer 1,415]

 

Loath though I am to post anything from the S*n, thought this might be of interest.

 

 

This from the BBC:

 

The black and white footage, which lasts about 17 seconds, shows the Queen playing with a dog on the lawn in the gardens of Balmoral, the Sun claims.

 

 

 

The Queen Mother then raises her arm in what looks like a Nazi salute, and after glancing towards her mother the Queen mimics the gesture. Prince Edward, the future Edward VIII, is also seen raising his arm.

Could Queen Elizardbreath II's grip on the national media be waning at last? Or is this one last act of vengeance from Murdoch before he carks it?

This is hilarious stuff. What it really proves again is that Britain (and the world) was lucky that Ed VIII reigned for less than a year... Lizzy was just seven, so she can't blamed for the gesture, but I'm surprised that her mum was teaching her a nazi salute. Naughty naughty Queen Mum...

 

If I had been a member of the Royal Family, I would have destroyed the original footage ages ago, but definitely no later than 1940. It's so compromising, and it could have damaged the Royal Family's reputation if someone had published it in the early 1940s. Then we would talk about the United Republick...

 

 

So i guess you haven't heard of the disgusting things the queen mum used to get up to then right ?

 

I agree this is something and nothing if someone had told me to give a nazi salute when i was 7 or if my parents were doing it chances i would of too.

[msc 18,483]

Edward VIII was a twat. It was a great source of luck, getting him to abdicate.

 

This is a bit of a non-story, anyhow. I mean, the English football team were ordered to give the Nazi salute in their friendly with Germany in 1936, which was well after we kind of get the hint Hitler wasn't exactly Jimmy Savi Rolf Har Bill Cos err, Tony Hart/Mr Rogers. And they didn't have the benefit of being seven years old.

 

And the Queen Mum was always a bit right wing, but she got forgiven due to her status as a first class alcoholic.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,220]

 

 

Loath though I am to post anything from the S*n, thought this might be of interest.

 

 

This from the BBC:

 

The black and white footage, which lasts about 17 seconds, shows the Queen playing with a dog on the lawn in the gardens of Balmoral, the Sun claims.

 

 

 

The Queen Mother then raises her arm in what looks like a Nazi salute, and after glancing towards her mother the Queen mimics the gesture. Prince Edward, the future Edward VIII, is also seen raising his arm.

Could Queen Elizardbreath II's grip on the national media be waning at last? Or is this one last act of vengeance from Murdoch before he carks it?

This is hilarious stuff. What it really proves again is that Britain (and the world) was lucky that Ed VIII reigned for less than a year... Lizzy was just seven, so she can't blamed for the gesture, but I'm surprised that her mum was teaching her a nazi salute. Naughty naughty Queen Mum...

 

If I had been a member of the Royal Family, I would have destroyed the original footage ages ago, but definitely no later than 1940. It's so compromising, and it could have damaged the Royal Family's reputation if someone had published it in the early 1940s. Then we would talk about the United Republick...

 

 

So i guess you haven't heard of the disgusting things the queen mum used to get up to then right ?

 

I agree this is something and nothing if someone had told me to give a nazi salute when i was 7 or if my parents were doing it chances i would of too.

 

Aye, she was a bit of a gal.

Mebee she knew whether Hitler only had one ball.......

[The Mad Hatter 1,092]

Aw FFS, what's the fuss, she isn't even trying

 

 

the queen did eventually get the moves

[Paul Bearer 6,116]

Loath though I am to post anything from the S*n, thought this might be of interest.

 

 

This from the BBC:

 

 

The black and white footage, which lasts about 17 seconds, shows the Queen playing with a dog on the lawn in the gardens of Balmoral, the Sun claims.

 

 

 

The Queen Mother then raises her arm in what looks like a Nazi salute, and after glancing towards her mother the Queen mimics the gesture. Prince Edward, the future Edward VIII, is also seen raising his arm.

 

Could Queen Elizardbreath II's grip on the national media be waning at last? Or is this one last act of vengeance from Murdoch before he carks it?

Shit paper JFT96. I noticed they didn't report the England squad did the same thing in 1938. Five years later.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,220]

 

Loath though I am to post anything from the S*n, thought this might be of interest.

 

 

This from the BBC:

 

The black and white footage, which lasts about 17 seconds, shows the Queen playing with a dog on the lawn in the gardens of Balmoral, the Sun claims.

 

 

 

The Queen Mother then raises her arm in what looks like a Nazi salute, and after glancing towards her mother the Queen mimics the gesture. Prince Edward, the future Edward VIII, is also seen raising his arm.

Could Queen Elizardbreath II's grip on the national media be waning at last? Or is this one last act of vengeance from Murdoch before he carks it?

Shit paper JFT96. I noticed they didn't report the England squad did the same thing in 1938. Five years later.

 

That's a fair comment, There is a picture floating about somewhere of those players giving it the 'Heil five' or summat.

However, and its not too unfair to say it, the England squad may have been doing that out of 'respect' for their German hosts..............aswell as having been told to by the foreign office!!

I think the point of the Suns expose has been missed by some.

Its not about a child giving the Heil Five its about her mother and uncle Edward the VIII being fucking Nazis.

Well they were, right?

[Sean 6,337]

I wonder if the cycle of parents-outliving-children will continue in the British Royal Family.

 

Mary of Teck (1867-1953) outlived her son, King George VI (1896-1952).

Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon (1900-2002) outlived her daughter, Princess Margaret (1930-2002).

 

Will Queen Elizabeth outlive Prince Charles (or another one of her children)?

 

P.S. There were cases of parents outliving children in older generations too, but I though I shouldn't list them because that was so long ago it was normal for, like, 50% of the population to die before their 30th birthday. (Not a real statistic, don't get butthurt).

I don`t think she will outlive any of her children.George VI and Margaret were chain smokers and Margaret drank like a fish.I don`t think any of the Queen`s children live wild lives except perhaps Andy.I reckon she may outlive Camilla Parker Bowles who has osteoporosis which killed her mother and grandmother.I also wouldn`t be surprised if she outlived her brother in law Antony Armstrong Jones ,The Kents and Princess Alexandra also. Her children though I doubt it.

[Paul Bearer 6,116]

 

 

Loath though I am to post anything from the S*n, thought this might be of interest.

 

This from the BBC:

 

 

The black and white footage, which lasts about 17 seconds, shows the Queen playing with a dog on the lawn in the gardens of Balmoral, the Sun claims.

 

The Queen Mother then raises her arm in what looks like a Nazi salute, and after glancing towards her mother the Queen mimics the gesture. Prince Edward, the future Edward VIII, is also seen raising his arm.

 

Could Queen Elizardbreath II's grip on the national media be waning at last? Or is this one last act of vengeance from Murdoch before he carks it?

Shit paper JFT96. I noticed they didn't report the England squad did the same thing in 1938. Five years later.

That's a fair comment, There is a picture floating about somewhere of those players giving it the 'Heil five' or summat.

However, and its not too unfair to say it, the England squad may have been doing that out of 'respect' for their German hosts..............aswell as having been told to by the foreign office!!

I think the point of the Suns expose has been missed by some.

Its not about a child giving the Heil Five its about her mother and uncle Edward the VIII being fucking Nazis.

Well they were, right?

I tried to post the picture of the England team doing the nazi salute, but I don't seem to be able to do it on an iPad. Or maybe I'm just a dick when it comes to posting pics on said iPad.