Comped 526 Posted February 7 29 minutes ago, ladyfiona said: I couldn't log on yesterday due to internet connection issues so don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but the Urology sister I spoke with today has said it's most likely bladder cancer based on where they did the tests. NHS referral treatment for cancer are done within 2 weeks. So private will of course get done like 2 days after diagnosis etc. Bladder cancer lines up with a number of articles and speculations I've seen elsewhere. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toast 16,133 Posted February 7 2 hours ago, Bibliogryphon said: Surely the brevity of the Harry visit is actual good news. He has shown up to offer support and condolence to his father (as is fit) has been reassured as to the nature of the illness and current prognosis and buggered off home because there is nothing else for him to do. If they were talking weeks or months then I think he would have stayed longer because there would have been more to discuss Harry will have been told nothing that isn't in the public domain. He can't be trusted not to sell it to the highest bidder. It's clear that he wasn't welcome. The King saw him for just long enough to tell him not to ask for any money and to fuck off. Harry was offered no accommodation and had to book into a hotel. 45 minutes ago, Sean said: Even if it's terminal it was caught by accident and treatment has started nearly immediately so I reckon you are probably right. I gather he had a pretty comprehensive medical on accession, so it's not something that's been lurking for very long. 3 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
prussianblue 1,027 Posted February 7 16 minutes ago, Toast said: Harry will have been told nothing that isn't in the public domain. He can't be trusted not to sell it to the highest bidder. It's clear that he wasn't welcome. The King saw him for just long enough to tell him not to ask for any money and to fuck off. Harry was offered no accommodation and had to book into a hotel. I gather he had a pretty comprehensive medical on accession, so it's not something that's been lurking for very long. You basically have the Harry equivalent of Trump Derangement Syndrome. 7 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Windsor 2,233 Posted February 7 2 hours ago, Toast said: I gather he had a pretty comprehensive medical on accession, so it's not something that's been lurking for very long. Out of interest, would they have offered the job to someone else if he failed his medical? 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toast 16,133 Posted February 8 4 hours ago, prussianblue said: You basically have the Harry equivalent of Trump Derangement Syndrome. I don't know what that means. But I see no shame in disliking someone who has been vicious, cruel, treacherous, dishonest, and an all-round cunt. As for the narcissist he married, I'm not even going to start or I'll be typing all night. 6 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yama 57 Posted February 8 On 07/02/2024 at 01:35, Bibliogryphon said: In terms of length of Reign. He has surpassed Lady Jane Gray, Edward V and Edward VIII and Richard III is next I was referring to England, the country (one of them) he is king of and where a significant number of poster here reside Ok got it. Not sure what you mean with the burial reference though, as George VI is buried in Windsor for example. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrWonderful 480 Posted February 8 6 hours ago, Toast said: I don't know what that means. But I see no shame in disliking someone who has been vicious, cruel, treacherous, dishonest, and an all-round cunt. As for the narcissist he married, I'm not even going to start or I'll be typing all night. I can't vouch for what happened when Harry visited his father, but I agree with you on everything you said above. He and his wife are both vile people. 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bibliogryphon 9,572 Posted February 8 2 hours ago, Yama said: Ok got it. Not sure what you mean with the burial reference though, as George VI is buried in Windsor for example. I take it you are not based in the UK Within the last 15 years an amateur historian called Phillipa Langley came up with a theory that Richard III was buried in an old friary within the walls of the City of Leicester and not thrown into the River Soar as legend had suggested but the location of the site was now covered by a council car park. She raised funds for an excavation and they did indeed find a body who was identified by DNA evidence to probably be King Richard III. The site is now a visitor centre and a tomb was created for the King in Leicester Cathedral and a burial service was held which was attended by Her Majesty the Queen. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
prussianblue 1,027 Posted February 8 32 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said: I take it you are not based in the UK Within the last 15 years an amateur historian called Phillipa Langley came up with a theory that Richard III was buried in an old friary within the walls of the City of Leicester and not thrown into the River Soar as legend had suggested but the location of the site was now covered by a council car park. She raised funds for an excavation and they did indeed find a body who was identified by DNA evidence to probably be King Richard III. The site is now a visitor centre and a tomb was created for the King in Leicester Cathedral and a burial service was held which was attended by Her Majesty the Queen. Tbf to Yama, your exact wording is a literal statement that he was the last: 'He needs to go to November to beat Richard III who was the last King to be buried in this country.....' Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bibliogryphon 9,572 Posted February 8 12 minutes ago, prussianblue said: Tbf to Yama, your exact wording is a literal statement that he was the last: 'He needs to go to November to beat Richard III who was the last King to be buried in this country.....' and he was The burial at Leicester Cathedral was more recent than that of George VI 3 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yama 57 Posted February 8 Ah OK, got it now. As in Richard III was re-buried after they found his 100s of years old body in the car park. 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RoverAndOut 4,746 Posted February 8 @Bibliogryphon just has to try and get Leicester into every discussion, don't worry. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kenny 283 Posted February 8 5 hours ago, RoverAndOut said: @Bibliogryphon just has to try and get Leicester into every discussion, don't worry. Don’t mention helicopters! 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Old Crem 3,583 Posted February 9 https://www.thesun.co.uk/royals/25826358/prince-harry-charles-royal-william/ Harry’s visit being blamed for people thinking Charles is worse than he is. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Master Obit 830 Posted February 9 25 minutes ago, The Old Crem said: https://www.thesun.co.uk/royals/25826358/prince-harry-charles-royal-william/ Harry’s visit being blamed for people thinking Charles is worse than he is. Why do you think that anything in the sun is remotely credible? 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Windsor 2,233 Posted February 9 2 hours ago, Master Obit said: Why do you think that anything in the sun is remotely credible? Because tits. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Old Crem 3,583 Posted February 11 The Telegraph say Charles will return weekly to London to meet the PM and undergo treatment. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bentrovato 1,087 Posted February 11 King Charles makes first public outing since cancer announcement - BBC News Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gcreptile 10,967 Posted February 11 40 minutes ago, Bentrovato said: King Charles makes first public outing since cancer announcement - BBC News Who is it, Prince Edward? 2 10 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bibliogryphon 9,572 Posted February 15 Might be worth holding onto any King Charles coinage that comes into your possession if they are not going to be around for long. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Master Obit 830 Posted February 15 2 hours ago, Bibliogryphon said: Might be worth holding onto any King Charles coinage that comes into your possession if they are not going to be around for long. They produce them in enormous quantities so they wouldn't really be "rare" even if they stopped tomorrow, it's just that they all got hoarded nowadays by bank workers and post office cashiers who believe the clickbait articles that insist they're worth a fortune. I've not had a single one in my change, and I pay cash for most transactions (accuse me of being a luddite if you want, but I prefer it). The only ones I've got in my collection are from people specifically saving them for me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brad252 807 Posted February 15 4 hours ago, Bibliogryphon said: Might be worth holding onto any King Charles coinage that comes into your possession if they are not going to be around for long. The banknotes would be where the biggest value is in such a scenario, given they haven't been released yet so will be even fewer in number (as well as being higher in fiat value of course). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SovietJohnny 93 Posted February 15 5 hours ago, Bibliogryphon said: Might be worth holding onto any King Charles coinage that comes into your possession if they are not going to be around for long. Yeah…like the Edward VIII postage stamps. Everyone hoarded them for the same reason. The result? They are virtually worthless. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
