call me wrong , if I am.. but...

Lynton

Lynton

awkward customer
Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,606
Name
Lynton (yes really!)
Edit My Images
No
So Prince wills and Kate have got upset because of photos's

I thought, if you ( as togger) on public land, then fair game.......
 
Harassment is not normal behavior. There's also an agreement that pics are not taken of underage royals apart from at official photoshoots.
 
I think this is with one particular photographer,who been stalking the nanny and baby while out on walks,but I guess as a member of the public who just came upon them,I don't where you would stand :confused:
 
Tot and nanny are also not the first royals he's trailed in this fashion.

(I know the nanny's not a royal but you get my drift :-) )

There's taking an opportunistic snap, and then there's stalking.
 
Paparazzi stalk/follow celebs all the time. It must be great to be a Royal and have the privilege of picking and choosing when to be in the media spotlight. I would hate someone following my nanny and baby but then if i chose to take millions of pounds from the public purse every year i would probably expect it. You would assume though that with all this wealth you could spend more time with your child and do away with the need for a nanny but i suppose thats me just being ridiculous as there are far more important things in life than your children. The Royals sicken me to my stomach. Taking money and spending it like it's going out of fashion whilst food banks become a normal part of every day life for millions across Britain. That was a huge factor in me voting for independence as soon after there would have been another referendum on whether to keep the Queen and she would have lost. Sorry for the rant but poverty for me is a far bigger issue than these people will ever face in their privileged lifetimes. No doubt there will be security around the future heir to the throne anyway so it's not as if he's in any danger.
 
Really pulls my bells this.. famous people getting upset at being photographed... kids nannys... photograph the lot ...... they cant have it both ways :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
There will always be people on both sides Byker. People who hate the rich taking from the poor when they have no need to do so and people who make excuses for them doing it. I'm quite happy with my stance and have no issues with you taking yours. That's what makes the world the place it is.
 
johnb said:
Scottduffy

Unfortunately you didn't win the first round so you didn't even get the chance to be royally beaten on a referendum about the Queen. She contributes far more to this country than most so wind your neck in
Click to expand...
They may very well do, presonally its not the money that bothers me but their inherited status and entitlement. Its not conducive to a modern democratic country that claims social mobility.
 
The Royal Family costs a family of four people £2.36 per year I believe. I think it's undoubtedly good value in pure financial terms as they do contribute to the country. Many other modern European countries also maintain a Royal family.

I personally have a much bigger problem with talentless individuals like Kim Kardashian, Katie Price (or even most premier league footballers) earning millions of pounds for contributing very little to society in my view.
 
Last edited:
Cartus said:
The Royal Family costs a family of four people £2.36 per year I believe. I think it's undoubtedly good value in pure financial terms as they do contribute to the country. Many other modern European countries also maintain a Royal family.

I personally have a much bigger problem with talentless individuals like Kim Kardashian, Katie Price (or even most premier league footballers) earning millions of pounds for contributing very little to society in my view.
Click to expand...
I am very much pro UK pro Royal family but scottduffy raises a good point. Why do they need a nanny when neither of them work and are away from the child? It does seem OTT. The child didn't ask to be born Royal but I doubt a baby gives a s*** if a tog takes a picture of it. I do think the paps go OTT for pictures of asinine things like Kate in the park with a baby. Who gives a s*** really but the public lap it up
 
scottduffy said:
There will always be people on both sides Byker. People who hate the rich taking from the poor when they have no need to do so and people who make excuses for them doing it. I'm quite happy with my stance and have no issues with you taking yours. That's what makes the world the place it is.
Click to expand...

You'll forgive me but I swore an oath of allegiance and I take that quite seriously,
I... swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will, as in duty bound, honestly and faithfully defend Her Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, in Person, Crown and Dignity against all enemies, and will observe and obey all orders of Her Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, and of the generals and officers set over me.

Plus as mentioned in the independence thread, the royals are what separates GB from being just any other country and also as mentioned in that thread, the amounts of money the Royals ARE GIVEN is independent to the amounts they generate for the country and to the amounts of revenue they put into the treasury.

But you carry on with your blinkers.
 
ST4 said:
Why do they need a nanny when neither of them work
Click to expand...

William served with the armed forces for 7 years and last I heard was training to take up a position as an air ambulance pilot where he intends to donate his full salary back to the service.

It seems a little unfair to say neither of them work.
 
ST4 said:
What does she do?
Click to expand...

A pretty hefty schedule of public engagements across the country, like most of the 'immediate' royals - well ok, when she isn't suffering lousy morning sickness I guess and yes, I know plenty of mums that suffered as badly and still had to carry on without a nanny simply because of costs, but then, not all their wealth is from state either, so swings and roundabouts on that for me.
 
ST4 said:
I am very much pro UK pro Royal family but scottduffy raises a good point. Why do they need a nanny when neither of them work and are away from the child? It does seem OTT. The child didn't ask to be born Royal but I doubt a baby gives a s*** if a tog takes a picture of it. I do think the paps go OTT for pictures of asinine things like Kate in the park with a baby. Who gives a s*** really but the public lap it up
Click to expand...

You'll forgive me if they feel a little sensitive to photographers, seeing as some hounded their mother to her death.
LOL - they do nothing eh? William was a search and resacue helicopter pilot - now works as a air ambulance pilot, plus they carry out royal appointments
http://www.royal.gov.uk/LatestNewsandDiary/Royaldiary/Introduction.aspx
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
ST4 said:
What does she do?
Click to expand...

Other than whatever royal duties she has i've no idea but you said 'neither' so it's completely irrelevant to my point.

As an aside i'd imagine they might need help at the moment because of her health (acute morning sickness).
 
By choice they wouldn't have a Nanny but their lifestyle dictates the necessity. There are numerous reports that state that they didn't want one, In fact they didn't for the first 6 months, because Kate breast fed and expressed so that William could help out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
H2O said:
Other than whatever royal duties she has i've no idea but you said 'neither' so it's completely irrelevant to my point.

As an aside i'd imagine they might need help at the moment because of her health (acute morning sickness).
Click to expand...

Do other pregnant women not get morning sickness, and have to go to work, juggle commitments all without nannies?

It seems, given she has the chance, to spend time with her child(ren), why not do that than hand them over to nannies?
 
ST4 said:
Do other pregnant women not get morning sickness, and have to go to work, juggle commitments all without nannies?

It seems, given she has the chance, to spend time with her child(ren), why not do that than hand them over to nannies?
Click to expand...

Of course they do but when it's that bad there is no way they can do anything, especially if they have to stay in hospital until it's under control..
 
Byker28i said:
You'll forgive me but I swore an oath of allegiance and I take that quite seriously,
I... swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will, as in duty bound, honestly and faithfully defend Her Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, in Person, Crown and Dignity against all enemies, and will observe and obey all orders of Her Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, and of the generals and officers set over me.

Plus as mentioned in the independence thread, the royals are what separates GB from being just any other country and also as mentioned in that thread, the amounts of money the Royals ARE GIVEN is independent to the amounts they generate for the country and to the amounts of revenue they put into the treasury.

But you carry on with your blinkers.
Click to expand...

I think quite a few people have taken that oath of allegiance,but I think my only allegiance, if I ever came under shell fire would be to get ass into the biggest f*****g foxhole I could find :)
 
jakeblu said:
They may very well do, presonally its not the money that bothers me but their inherited status and entitlement. Its not conducive to a modern democratic country that claims social mobility.
Click to expand...

what utter toss.

If you got off your ass and applied yourself you could well find yourself in those circles. Several unmarried royals out there you could pull. You just need to put youself in the position to move in the right circles. Several "civvies" have married royals. You just cant be bothered and would rather whine about them on a BB.

And as for the moaning Jock, accounts have proven than the royals contribute a damn site more wealth to the UK than you lot who are more than happy to suck up the english taxpayers money to fund yourselves. You lost, tough.
 
essexash said:
what utter toss.

If you got off your ass and applied yourself you could well find yourself in those circles. Several unmarried royals out there you could pull. You just need to put youself in the position to move in the right circles. Several "civvies" have married royals. You just cant be bothered and would rather whine about them on a BB.

And as for the moaning Jock, accounts have proven than the royals contribute a damn site more wealth to the UK than you lot who are more than happy to suck up the english taxpayers money to fund yourselves. You lost, tough.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the tax collection from 5.5million British people up here is less than the revenue generated by the royal family when you consider their expenditure. I get your post, but its probably factually a bit off the mark.

Cg_Girl said:
Of course they do but when it's that bad there is no way they can do anything, especially if they have to stay in hospital until it's under control..
Click to expand...

can't kate go to a hospital, she doesn't need a nanny, she by the sounds of things doesn't even want one. why bother with one, she is capable of looking after them kids for sure
 
Last edited:
scottduffy said:
There will always be people on both sides Byker. People who hate the rich taking from the poor when they have no need to do so and people who make excuses for them doing it. I'm quite happy with my stance and have no issues with you taking yours. That's what makes the world the place it is.
Click to expand...

How do the rich take from the poor?

Given the rich pay 40% income tax, poorer pay 20% basic and very poor pay nothing at all, you might say the poor steal from the rich?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
ST4 said:
can't kate go to a hospital, she doesn't need a nanny, she by the sounds of things doesn't even want one. why bother with one, she is capable of looking after them kids for sure
Click to expand...

I would imagine after what happened last time she was in hospital with morning sickness has left her somewhat unwilling to do it this time even though it was technically it was in no way her fault.
 
ST4 said:
I'm not sure the tax collection from 5.5million British people up here is less than the revenue generated by the royal family when you consider their expenditure. I get your post, but its probably factually a bit off the mark.



can't kate go to a hospital, she doesn't need a nanny, she by the sounds of things doesn't even want one. why bother with one, she is capable of looking after them kids for sure
Click to expand...

You have a net loss of £12 billion as pointed out in the independence thread. Remember salmond couldn't get the books to balance.
So scotland needs £12 billion from the rest of the uk to balance it's books. Rich taking from the poor, after all you get free medical, education, all paid for by the rest of us.

Crown estates made £253 million for the treasury last year. I'm sure you can work out the percentage the royals get back from that.
 
Last edited:
Yv said:
I would imagine after what happened last time she was in hospital with morning sickness has left her somewhat unwilling to do it this time even though it was technically it was in no way her fault.
Click to expand...

No technically about it really.
 
simonblue said:
, if I ever came under shell fire would be to get ass into the biggest f*****g foxhole I could find :)
Click to expand...

that's a bad idea - you want a small narrow fitting foxhole -getting in a big ass one is asking to wind up sharing it with a live mortar shell.

That aside ive taken the same oath but It doesn't preclude being critical of them , just that you should defend and protect even if you think they are weapons grades bell ends.

That said why shouldn't they have a nanny - lots of rich people have nannies , au pairs etc ?
 
big soft moose said:
that's a bad idea - you want a small narrow fitting foxhole -getting in a big ass one is asking to wind up sharing it with a live mortar shell.

That aside ive taken the same oath but It doesn't preclude being critical of them , just that you should defend and protect even if you think they are weapons grades bell ends.

That said why shouldn't they have a nanny - lots of rich people have nannies , au pairs etc ?
Click to expand...

Should of put deepest,but never said anything about a nanny ?

Also not to sure why i should as you say (just that you should defend and protect even if you think they are weapons grades bell ends)

:)
 
simonblue said:
Should of put deepest,but never said anything about a nanny ?

Also not to sure why i should as you say (just that you should defend and protect even if you think they are weapons grades bell ends)

:)
Click to expand...

Should have. ;)
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
By choice they wouldn't have a Nanny but their lifestyle dictates the necessity. There are numerous reports that state that they didn't want one, In fact they didn't for the first 6 months, because Kate breast fed and expressed so that William could help out.
Click to expand...

There are so may quotes here that make me chuckle but this is my favourite. They wouldn't have a nanny by choice !!! They've been brought up by nannies and bloody hired help the lot of them. It's all they know.

By the way instead of bigging up Prince William for giving up his salary why don't we ask him to live on it like the rest and give up the millions he takes from the public?

Another point. How can anyone say we get good value from the Royals when we have no idea how much they cost us since they refuse to publish their obscene security costs?

Diana hounded to her death by paps eh. The Royals hated Diana because the public loved her and sided with her against that awful family. What other family can take money from the public, wear Nazi uniforms for the pleasure and get good press? They are vile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top