michael69 Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 ...especially in front of about 2 billion people!
asudevil08 Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 haha. Never too early to show what the rest of your life will be like.
CBL Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 Getting to know Prince Richard. Surely she's looking for Prince Albert
mazolaman Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 The most unrealistic thing about this photo is that it is happening AFTER he is married!
Ryan Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 The most unrealistic thing about this photo is that it is happening AFTER he is married! I think it's innocent enough, it looks like she just stooped down to get his helmet.. Oh this could go on all day.
gigabyte056 Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 I think it's innocent enough, it looks like she just stooped down to get his helmet.. Oh this could go on all day. And it will, look at the poor bridesmaid, shut your eyes honey not your hears.
Ryan Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 She was told there was a gagging order regarding the wedding details.
cigarroverzulu Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 The most unrealistic thing about this photo is that it is happening AFTER he is married! I was told one time "Married women don"t do that sort of thing." WTF???
Guest rob Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 While on the theme of Royal photos and their inappropriate moments.... this one has always made me laugh!
cigarroverzulu Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 So, how much did this wedding cost??? How many people are out of work in England???
Guest robustog Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 So, how much did this wedding cost??? How many people are out of work in England??? Supposedly the cost to support the Royal Family is about 1.00 per person per year.
Ryan Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 Supposedly the cost to support the Royal Family is about 1.00 per person per year. I'm certainly not the greatest apologist for Britain's royal family but looking at the throngs of people who were in London yesterday and counting any number of the 2 billion watching yesterday who decided to go see the sights for themselves having seen it on TV, the UK government will make back multiples of the cost in foreign income. That royal family and their houses, it's like Disneyland, it brings in throngs of people. I'm spending a bit of time in London these days and it's often 6 deep outside Buckingham palace with people trying to get a glimpse of a bit of brass or a shiny boot. I would be very surprised, if anybody cared to work it out, if the tourist income they bring in, even in a normal year, didn't cover the cost of keeping them. Many times over. Also, I think I heard somewhere that the bride's family paid half the cost of the wedding, I could be wrong on that, I don't care enough to google it.
michael69 Posted April 30, 2011 Author Posted April 30, 2011 I'm certainly not the greatest apologist for Britain's royal family but looking at the throngs of people who were in London yesterday and counting any number of the 2 billion watching yesterday who decided to go see the sights for themselves having seen it on TV, the UK government will make back multiples of the cost in foreign income.That royal family and their houses, it's like Disneyland, it brings in throngs of people. I'm spending a bit of time in London these days and it's often 6 deep outside Buckingham palace with people trying to get a glimpse of a bit of brass or a shiny boot. I would be very surprised, if anybody cared to work it out, if the tourist income they bring in, even in a normal year, didn't cover the cost of keeping them. Many times over. Also, I think I heard somewhere that the bride's family paid half the cost of the wedding, I could be wrong on that, I don't care enough to google it. Agreed, completely. If nothing else, our economy would suffer very very badly if the monarchy was "removed". I happen to like the whole thing anyway; heritage, history etc etc etc as to the point somebody made about how many were out of work and how much wedding cost; there's a consistent 80% support for the royals here (from all walks of life and income levels), and there would be a HUGE number of job losses should we become republicans. the wedding was paid for by the Queen; the security (admittedly very costly) was covered by the taxpayer.
LeafLover Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 The bride looked beautiful!!! But, wasn't the bride's sister HOT!!!!!!!!!!
jnt Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 Flash back from Coming to America. The royal penis is clean Your Highness-Bather
anacostiakat Posted April 30, 2011 Posted April 30, 2011 The most unrealistic thing about this photo is that it is happening AFTER he is married!
Habanos2000 Posted May 1, 2011 Posted May 1, 2011 The bride looked beautiful!!!But, wasn't the bride's sister HOT!!!!!!!!!! Amen brother!!!
frenchkiwi Posted May 2, 2011 Posted May 2, 2011 gotta love the shocked expression on the little girls face... hello john thomas. Supposedly the cost to support the Royal Family is about 1.00 per person per year. 60 million quid, not bad, but the actual cost is far higher as the property that they own (e.g. Balmoral Castle) and/or use goes into the billions. In fact it is so great that it was listed as "incalculable" by the Independent. If people want to subsidise one particular family in their country with billions worth of land, staff, income, influence and lives of luxury accorded by birth right, on the basis of culture, tradition, and most of all, tabloid celebrity people watching... good for them. I don't imagine that the poor and the scots welsh etc are all for it though! The French had a great track record on efficient cost-cutting measures in this area... they invented the Guillotine.
Ken Gargett Posted May 2, 2011 Posted May 2, 2011 I'm certainly not the greatest apologist for Britain's royal family but looking at the throngs of people who were in London yesterday and counting any number of the 2 billion watching yesterday who decided to go see the sights for themselves having seen it on TV, the UK government will make back multiples of the cost in foreign income.That royal family and their houses, it's like Disneyland, it brings in throngs of people. I'm spending a bit of time in London these days and it's often 6 deep outside Buckingham palace with people trying to get a glimpse of a bit of brass or a shiny boot. I would be very surprised, if anybody cared to work it out, if the tourist income they bring in, even in a normal year, didn't cover the cost of keeping them. Many times over. Also, I think I heard somewhere that the bride's family paid half the cost of the wedding, I could be wrong on that, I don't care enough to google it. absolutely. i am as anti the monarchy, as it relats to australia, as one could imagine but for britain, if nothing else it is a huge earner in tourism. but as for wasting any time watching this rubbish, leave that to others. an inbred layabout marries and someone known as britain's worst social climber before she even met him. almost enough for me to feel sorry for damp island. apparently she and her sister were known as the wisteria sisters - terribly fragrant and unstoppable climbers.
Ken Gargett Posted May 2, 2011 Posted May 2, 2011 60 million quid, not bad, but the actual cost is far higher as the property that they own (e.g. Balmoral Castle) and/or use goes into the billions. In fact it is so great that it was listed as "incalculable" by the Independent. the mention of balmoral castle and security brings back memories. a mate and i accidently set off the perimeter alarms quite a few years back. we were innocently having a bit of fun in the snow on their fence. this was in the days when security was a touch more lax around the world, as we could have got hundreds of terrorists over the frence by the time someone turned up, armed with little more than a stern look. though even back then, the threat of the IRA should surely have meant a better effort. i can only assume no one was in residence.
gigabyte056 Posted May 2, 2011 Posted May 2, 2011 60 million quid, not bad, but the actual cost is far higher as the property that they own (e.g. Balmoral Castle) and/or use goes into the billions. In fact it is so great that it was listed as "incalculable" by the Independent.the mention of balmoral castle and security brings back memories. a mate and i accidently set off the perimeter alarms quite a few years back. we were innocently having a bit of fun in the snow on their fence. this was in the days when security was a touch more lax around the world, as we could have got hundreds of terrorists over the frence by the time someone turned up, armed with little more than a stern look. though even back then, the threat of the IRA should surely have meant a better effort. i can only assume no one was in residence. Or maybe just prince Charles, whom everyone is trying to get rid of ,with that horse of a wife of his
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now