King Charles III

[The Old Crem 3,606]

7 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

I agree and accept there could be more going on. It certainly fits with what happened with QEII. But, while they never confirmed she had cancer, it was clear she was slowing down and discussions started to get more morbid, although we maybe didn't believe it enough. Almost missing the Jubilee was a massive red flag in hindsight.

 

I don't doubt the validity or veracity of your source, you have a great track record, but if he is worse than is being reported, I hope they don't keep secret until he's on his deathbed, that would be a terrible shock, especially if it's a year rather than 2. And I still hope you're wrong.

And it’s a big difference between being 75 and 95/96. They would be a backlash if Charles died and the official line was until the end that he was ok and getting treatment and he was being shown working etc till near the end. 

[Mango 174]

19 minutes ago, Ulitzer95 said:

Ok. You just believe everything you read in the papers then. The controlled and censored media. 

They never told us the Queen had bone cancer. They still haven't. They even omitted a proper cause from her death certificate.

I don't know how gullible you need to be to not see that there's more going on.

It's not gullible. You can't just act as if unnamed sources are somehow reliable. It's completely absurd.

 

It's also completely ridiculous to assume the King has given up. People can and have survived what he's got. Jimmy Carter managed to survive metastatic cancer and he's still with us almost a decade on. If Charles' doctors are upbeat, that's obviously a good indication.

[Ulitzer95 12,634]

1 minute ago, mymango said:

It's not gullible. You can't just act as if unnamed sources are somehow reliable. It's completely absurd.

 

It's also completely ridiculous to assume the King has given up. People can and have survived what he's got. Jimmy Carter managed to survive metastatic cancer and he's still with us almost a decade on. If Charles' doctors are upbeat, that's obviously a good indication.

Of course you'd find a way to make this about fucking Jimmy Carter. Seek help mango boy.

[Mango 174]

Just now, Ulitzer95 said:

Of course you'd find a way to make this about fucking Jimmy Carter. Seek help mango boy.

It's relevant here though. He survived cancer against all the odds and is still surviving now. If he can do it, I've got no doubt in my mind Charles can as well.

[JQW 282]

Could this be why a May election has been ruled out?

[Ulitzer95 12,634]

1 minute ago, mymango said:

It's relevant here though. He survived cancer against all the odds and is still surviving now. If he can do it, I've got no doubt in my mind Charles can as well.

No, it really isn't. There are hundreds of types of cancer. "Cancer" is not in itself a disease. It's a group of many different illnesses that vary greatly depending on when they are caught, the health of the individual, genetics, how they've spread, and many other factors. Comparing one person's survival and saying "look he survived, so why can't you?" is never how it works.
 

5 minutes ago, mymango said:

It's not gullible. You can't just act as if unnamed sources are somehow reliable. It's completely absurd.

 

It's also completely ridiculous to assume the King has given up. People can and have survived what he's got. Jimmy Carter managed to survive metastatic cancer and he's still with us almost a decade on. If Charles' doctors are upbeat, that's obviously a good indication.

You really think they're going to put a statement out saying "the doctors as despondent"? That's not how it works. There's a reason why it's "keep calm and carry on". You don't break character – you remain resilient and hold it together.
 

[Brad252 807]

7 minutes ago, JQW said:

Could this be why a May election has been ruled out?

There are 101 reasons why a May election has been ruled out, I doubt the King potentially dying in the next 8 months is one of them.

[Mango 174]

15 minutes ago, Ulitzer95 said:

No, it really isn't. There are hundreds of types of cancer. "Cancer" is not in itself a disease. It's a group of many different illnesses that vary greatly depending on when they are caught, the health of the individual, genetics, how they've spread, and many other factors. Comparing one person's survival and saying "look he survived, so why can't you?" is never how it works.
 

You really think they're going to put a statement out saying "the doctors as despondent"? That's not how it works. There's a reason why it's "keep calm and carry on". You don't break character – you remain resilient and hold it together.
 

It's entirely possible Charles beats the odds just like Carter did. It's absolutely possible and I don't know why you're being so cynical about his prospects based on anonymous, unnamed sources that you haven't been able to independently verify. If that source told you they were sleeping with the Princess of Wales, would you believe them as well? To believe this rubbish is so ridiculous it would be laughable if it wasn't so outrageous and borderline treasonous. 

 

Whoever gave you that misinformation is a scumbag of the highest order.

[The Old Crem 3,606]

6 minutes ago, Brad252 said:

There are 101 reasons why a May election has been ruled out, I doubt the King potentially dying in the next 8 months is one of them.

If anything they would rush an election to avoid him dying during the Campaign. 

[Comped 528]

9 minutes ago, mymango said:

It's entirely possible Charles beats the odds just like Carter did. It's absolutely possible and I don't know why you're being so willingly cynical about his prospects based on anonymous, unnamed sources that you haven't been able to independently verify. If that source told you they were sleeping with the Princess of Wales, would you believe them as well? To believe this rubbish is so ridiculous it would be laughable if it wasn't so outrageous and borderline treasonous. 

 

Whoever gave you that misinformation is a scumbag of the highest order.

Literally the only thing making me believe that this could remotely be possible is that Ulitzer has a very good track record. Otherwise all public signs point in the complete opposite direction.

 

Personally my sign will be if Charles travels to France for the D-Day anniversary. If he does and participates in the full program of events as scheduled, he's definitely in better shape than suggested here.

[Ulitzer95 12,634]

9 minutes ago, mymango said:

It's entirely possible Charles beats the odds just like Carter did. It's absolutely possible and I don't know why you're being so cynical about his prospects based on anonymous, unnamed sources that you haven't been able to independently verify. If that source told you they were sleeping with the Princess of Wales, would you believe them as well? To believe this rubbish is so ridiculous it would be laughable if it wasn't so outrageous and borderline treasonous. 

 

Whoever gave you that misinformation is a scumbag of the highest order.

That's what this is all about for you, isn't it? You're a hardcore royalist and think that discussing and speculating about their health is treasonous.

In other words you're a nut job and give a bad name to the majority of moderate royalists. The Royals are not above scrutiny and can be subject to speculation just as much as anyone else. If you have a problem with what we do here, then leave the forum. A few other users have suggested that you may not be mature enough to be on here. Take a hint a go elsewhere.

[Mango 174]

7 minutes ago, Ulitzer95 said:

That's what this is all about for you, isn't it? You're a hardcore royalist and think that discussing and speculating about their health is treasonous.

In other words you're a nut job and give a bad name to the majority of moderate royalists. The Royals are not above scrutiny and can be subject to speculation just as much as anyone else. If you have a problem with what we do here, then leave the forum. A few other users have suggested that you may not be mature enough to be on here. Take a hint a go elsewhere.

No, you can't label someone a nutjob for calling out unverifiable information based on anonymous sources that can't be independently confirmed. The idea that whoever you spoke to was able to get the King's surgeon to divulge private medical information? How on earth are you this gullible?

 

I'm not giving a name, bad or otherwise, to anyone. I just think it's absolutely outrageous to be writing off the King's life. It's completely disgusting and I think anybody with a shred of decency would agree. I've frequented this forum for over a decade, so I think I'll be fine.

[DCI Frank Burnside 3,887]

Be interesting to see how this plays out if true. With QEII they could hide behind things being down old age etc.....  With Charles not so much even if he's in his mid 70's

[Ulitzer95 12,634]

1 minute ago, mymango said:

No, you can't label someone a nutjob for calling out unverifiable information based on anonymous sources that can't be independently confirmed. 

 

I've frequented this forum for over a decade, I think I'll be fine.

This isn't Wikipedia. I don't need to present published sources. It's a fucking forum mango boy. A forum. Where people chat, discuss, gossip and speculate. What part of this are you not understanding?

[TQR 14,398]

1 minute ago, mymango said:

I've frequented this forum for over a decade, I think I'll be fine.

 

You've been a member for about a year and a half, and for there or thereabouts a year and a half of that, you've been a twat.

[Mango 174]

1 minute ago, Ulitzer95 said:

This isn't Wikipedia. I don't need to present published sources. It's a fucking forum mango boy. A forum. Where people chat, discuss, gossip and speculate. What part of this are you not understanding?

You're a Wikipedia editor, like me, and I expected more from you. I still do, even after all this, since you've done a lot of good work there. 

[Mango 174]

5 minutes ago, TQR said:

 

You've been a member for about a year and a half, and for there or thereabouts a year and a half of that, you've been a twat.

You've made a name for yourself as a twat on this forum, so I'd be careful throwing stones in that glasshouse.

[Ulitzer95 12,634]

Just now, mymango said:

You're a Wikipedia editor, like me, and I expected more from you. I still do, even after all this, since you've done a lot of good work there. 

Don't care, virgin.

[Mango 174]

Just now, Ulitzer95 said:

Don't care, virgin.

Whatever. Just don't write him off. Look at how many times we've written Carter off.

 

It's entirely possible he gets through this and you know that.

[TQR 14,398]

2 minutes ago, mymango said:

You've made a name for yourself as a twat on this forum, so I'd be careful throwing stones in that glasshouse.

 

I know. Difference is, people enjoy reading my twattery.

[Toast 16,140]

34 minutes ago, mymango said:

It's entirely possible Charles beats the odds just like Carter did. It's absolutely possible and I don't know why you're being so cynical about his prospects based on anonymous, unnamed sources that you haven't been able to independently verify. If that source told you they were sleeping with the Princess of Wales, would you believe them as well? To believe this rubbish is so ridiculous it would be laughable if it wasn't so outrageous and borderline treasonous. 

 

Whoever gave you that misinformation is a scumbag of the highest order.

 

You don't know if the source was unnamed. Ulitzer didn't say that.  He isn't going to identify anyone here for obvious reasons.

[ladyfiona 2,586]

Not to godmod but can you take your bickering elsewhere. You've already ruined the Jimmy Carter thread which I now avoid.

[Mango 174]

Just now, Toast said:

 

You don't know if the source was unnamed. Ulitzer didn't say that.  He isn't going to identify anyone here for obvious reasons.

The idea that the King's surgeon would divulge private medical information to a guy at a newspaper, fully expecting him to keep his counsel, beggars belief, surely?

Just now, ladyfiona said:

Not to godmod but can you take your bickering elsewhere. You've already ruined the Jimmy Carter thread which I now avoid.

I've hardly done most of the posting there. You've probably got me confused with tango. 

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

12 minutes ago, mymango said:

Whatever. Just don't write him off. Look at how many times we've written Carter off.

 

It's entirely possible he gets through this and you know that.

 

And Ulitzer didn't write him off. He reported what he'd heard. Doesn't mean people don't beat bad diagnoses, but just changes the odds.

[Mango 174]

Just now, RoverAndOut said:

 

And Ulitzer didn't write him off. He reported what he'd heard. Doesn't mean people don't beat bad diagnoses, but just changes the odds.

Ulitzer messaged me to say "he's fucked".