Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Queen Elizabeth II dies

Options
15859616364108

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭rogerywalters


    Its my opinion and youve a different one. She was head of state for atrocities. That is a fact. Will Charles, William and George be? We dont know yet. So i cant tell you if ill be glad when they die. It wont end in my lifetime anyways.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,861 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    I was thinking why is abdication a big deal because it has happened before but I forgot that was for personal reasons and not political.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,274 ✭✭✭EOQRTL


    Say's it all really 😀



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,571 ✭✭✭lawrencesummers


    Their priorities are ridiculous.

    Their titles and kingdom are more important than family.

    His mother barely a weekend dead and the new king has plans for NI, welsh and Scottish appearances well underway.

    Surely he could be allowed to mourn his mother, spend time with family before getting wheeled out to stoke the fires of the propaganda machine of British greatness and instead visit their conquered lands once the funeral is over.


    Family my left one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    So we have posters saying they are glad that a head of state is dead.

    And because of actions that they acknowledge after a series of Chinese burns that the head of state constitutionally could have had no hand, act or part in.

    Hell of a big-brain political position to stake out I must say.

    They can't say yet if they'll be glad of the death of successors for unnamed actions they constitutionally can have no hand, act or part in either.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,218 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    Well this is it isn't it.

    The family may be very wealthy and want for nothing but they are at the beck and call of protocol and the system.

    The King is not allowed to mourn his mother like any son can.

    He was not even allowed follow her cortege from the house to the church, instead he has to be hundreds of miles away doing some other duty.

    And this week he had to visit x, y and z locations and say a, b and c so that it's all prim and proper.

    And that's why Harry got out, he liked the trappings of being a member, the wealth etc but he was not willing to put in the hard yards, not willing to be "owned" by the state and only allowed do what the state dictated he do.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,637 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I think Harry got out because the media literally hounded his mother to death. It follows that he doesn't want the same for his wife.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,622 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    It's like being one of the quintuplets, sure, with more money and "prestige", but you've one life, it's understandable why some would want out of enforced "duty" and creating heirs (isn't that Charles summed up?).

    Or you could just take the p*ss out of it like is happening in Thailand right now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,535 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    He doesn't "have plans", its protocol, I get it.....you don't understand the protocol and why these visits are taken but he's not doing it by choice, it's his job and his duty and he is following through with it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,073 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    they are speaking on behalf of the irish people, that is just the fact whether you like it or not.

    the english who would be bothering to take the time to care about them will get over it, most of us haven't heard of them in years anyway.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 55,529 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Nonsense.

    The job of the monarchy goes on immediately. The Queen knew this, as did Charles.

    They said their goodbyes, and a person can mourn and grieve whilst also continuing their duties.

    If you were ever in doubt about family, just look at Sophie and Zara and Beatrice and some others on their walkabouts to see the flowers and condolences. Genuine sadness and emotions. No different than any humans.

    The Queen was 96. It was expected that she was coming to an end. Her children all knew this. Stop making out that just because duty and service continues that these aren’t real people with real sadness and real grief and real emotions here.



  • Registered Users Posts: 932 ✭✭✭snowstorm445


    Have to say the one thing that really has stuck with me (and I'm not speaking about the British royal family in particular, it would be notable at any funeral or mourning ceremony) over the past few days is the sheer number of people with phones out. I just watched the procession now and it's a sea of phones, not a single person just quietly or respectfully looking on. It might be a huge ceremonial public occasion but it is still a funeral with mourners following the hearse - and yet people are whacking their phones out for a few snaps for their Instagram stories like it's just public entertainment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 55,529 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Yes, I noticed that, too. On the "fab four" walkabout, Kate was mixing with the crowd and there was one tattooed lad with a phone almost stuck in her face. It looked so ignorant and disrespectful, but I guess it's the world we live in.



  • Registered Users Posts: 55,529 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Jedward are speaking on behalf of the Irish people with their views/tweets? WTF!!!!



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,861 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    So is Trevor Sinclair speaking on behalf of all English people ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,580 ✭✭✭JDD


    I do sort of agree with the other poster. It ties in again with what I see as the English relationship with grief. Of course this is a generalisation, but there is an expectation that there is a stiff upper lip, a sort of "get on with it" attitude when someone close to you dies. And while the general public are allowed to mourn the Queen's death (and the attending catharsis that brings them from the repressed grief in their own lives) tha,t permission to mourn does not extend to immediate royal family members. How can they push the "blitz spirit" fallacy if the royal family are allowed weeks off to mourn their own family members? It was the same when Diana died - they had William and Harry out photographed while greeting people and looking at the flowers within three or four days of her death. Duty to the public comes first above all else. I do wonder where the royal family get their catharsis? It's probably one of the reasons Harry left.

    I do wonder, as King, whether Charles could start dismantling some of this - quite frankly, cruel - protocol. He certainly seems, as time has gone on, to have become more "in touch" with his and his family's feelings and I don't think he'd be easily rolled over by the courtiers if he felt strongly about something.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,160 ✭✭✭Be right back


    Oh, are they now? I'm Irish and would rather they didn't speak on my behalf.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    Funny you should mention Thailand. Now there's a real joker of a monarch*.

    He appears to live in Germany with his court full-time, pulling strings from a hotel in Bavaria (although his sister seems to be taking up some of his duties and is much more popular).

    The government of Germany is concerned that he's digging-in for good, and that in effect Thailand will be ran in large part from Deutschland. Whispers are they're trying to find a diplomatically sensitive way to get him to go home.

    *Not a constitutional monarch of the European variant in case it needs to be said.



  • Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Tough- if it’s said on boards.ie that they’re speaking on behalf of Ireland it must be true 😂😂😂😜



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,073 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    yes .

    realistically most irish people think the monarchy is a load of nonsense.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,233 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    People can be put forward for the "Queen's Honour" by parliament and certain people can lobby for them. But the Royal head of state has to approve the candidate before they're knighted. Famously, Thatcher lobbied for Jimmy Saville's knighthood and, as far as I know, Queenie wasn't too enamoured with the idea but acquiesced. She was also rather iffy about knighting Tony Blair.

    So, technically, the monarch can refuse approval to knight someone if they so wish, even if the Cabinet Office are the ones who offer advice on who should get the award. It is the crown's honour the monarch is bestowing after all. The crown is also responsible for stripping people of their knighthood too, like Robert Mugabe and Anthony Blunt after they were shown up.

    From www.royal.uk - "As 'fountain of honour' in the UK, The Queen has the sole right of conferring titles of honour on deserving people from all walks of life, in public recognition of their merit, service or bravery."

    In fact, Lizzie refused to award Mick Jagger with an honour in the 90's, but Charles eventually ended up doing it instead in 2003.




  • Registered Users Posts: 55,529 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Ok, so all now seems most.......Fair enough.....maybe we just need to butt out and let Britain decide on what is and isn’t right. The actual neck of those two twits to try lecture Britain on the monarchy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,250 ✭✭✭Pwindedd


    I'm sure they do. But it's a British load of nonsense and has no bearing on Irish life today. My Irish friends have been nothing but respectful and supportive to me over the last few days. Nothing obsequious, just a check-in and "how you doing" kind of thing. They've also refrained from sending me memes and whatnot. Of which i'm sure there are many and I bet most of them quite humorous. It's called respect... and class. I like to think these are the people that represent Ireland as I know and love it.

    When Jedward represent the "Voice of Ireland" you know all is not quite right with the world...(their twitter is well worth a gander if you like a laugh though -the comments are hilarious from either viewpoint), but it should be viewed as nothing more than childish banter.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,073 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    well this thread and the M&H thread would show that it is most who think it is rubbish but a small few don't.

    yeah i have no problem with jedward lecturing britain, it needs to be lectured to as it has regressed in many respects in the name of brexit.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    Has the British tax-payer figuered out the personal cost of this ? It seems to me that the British are worried about utility bills (like us all). Unless of course we happen to be one of those folks....who never worried about a bill or a funeral expense! I'm not upset that Q.E.2.'s children are spared that burden. We would all like to be spared.



  • Registered Users Posts: 500 ✭✭✭Marcos


    I haven't bothered going through all 61 pages of this thread, but there's an awful bang of North Korea over this. With the one official photo of her on a black background on TV, on all electronic hoarding, and advertising including in shops. I even saw a screenshot of that on some

    one's Nintendo FFS. The BBC editing pieces to drown out the boos during the proclamation of the King in Edinburgh, and cops arresting people holding up placards and charging them with breach of the peace.

    Even a placard saying something as simple as "Not my king" leads to cops surrounding and "escorting" a protestor away. It reminds me of those anti war protestors arrested in Moscow for holding up placards. Even a blank placard!


    When most of us say "social justice" we mean equality under the law opposition to prejudice, discrimination and equal opportunities for all. When Social Justice Activists say "social justice" they mean an emphasis on group identity over the rights of the individual, a rejection of social liberalism, and the assumption that unequal outcomes are always evidence of structural inequalities.

    Andrew Doyle, The New Puritans.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,535 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Stop, Jedward don't even speak for their own family 🙄



  • Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    If you say Andrew is a sick old man, here on boards, you’ll probably receive a few thanks.

    say it at Andrew while he’s walking behind his mothers coffin and you’ll get arrested 😂


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11203961/Prince-Andrew-appears-suit-follows-Queens-coffin-Edinburgh.html



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,580 ✭✭✭JDD


    Bizarrely, that's quite a balanced piece by the Daily Mail. They are not villifying the protester - in fact they seem quite sympathetic towards him. Unusually, they are also making the point that Andrew will be allowed to wear his military uniform at the Westminster vigil, whereas Harry will not, despite Harry doing two "tours" of Afghanistan and serving in the army for 10 years.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




Advertisement