Duke Wellington Posted March 18 #1 Share Posted March 18 (edited) Russia first put it on their news yesterday that the King had died, but we have denied it. But a lot of news presenters are dressed in dark clothing, the flag at Buckingham Palace has been lowered to half mast, and we have just been told to expect a major announcement within 48 hours. Edited March 18 by Duke Wellington 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kittens Are Jerks Posted March 18 #2 Share Posted March 18 According to Newsweek's Fact Check, King Charles' death is a baseless rumour spread by Russians. https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-rumor-king-charles-iii-dead-spread-russians-1880409 3 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Saru Posted March 18 Popular Post #3 Share Posted March 18 Rumors about an announcement have been doing the rounds for a couple of days but nothing seems to have come of it. Unless something does get announced, I think this is all a bit of a non-event. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/bbc-royal-family-announcement/ 6 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted March 18 #4 Share Posted March 18 (edited) Kate was seen with William at a farm show on Saturday. So many rumors I certainly hope she is recovering well. I hope King Charles is responding well to his treatments. Kate Middleton reportedly spotted with Prince William amid photo editing controversy - ABC News (go.com) ABC World News Tonight is airing pictures of Kate and William now. Edited March 18 by susieice 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted March 18 #5 Share Posted March 18 (edited) Buckingham Palace is saying King Charles is alive and continuing with official and personal business. A Russian media had falsely reported his passing. King Charles III Is Alive, Buckingham Palace Confirms After Russian Media Falsely Reports His Death (msn.com) Fact Check: False Rumor That King Charles III Is Dead Spread by Russians (msn.com) Edited March 18 by susieice 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waspie_Dwarf Posted March 18 #6 Share Posted March 18 45 minutes ago, Duke Wellington said: the flag at Buckingham Palace has been lowered to half mast This is a red flag that King Charles isn't dead. The Royal Standard, which is flown where ever the monarch is in residence, is never flown at half mast. It represents the continuation of the monarchy and, if Charles had died, would be lower where ever Charles was and raised where ever William is. When Elizabeth died, Charles was with her and so it wasn't lowered. 3 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted March 18 #7 Share Posted March 18 The rumors on social media are horrible. No, Kate Middleton has not been murdered She was seen with William on Saturday. Royal Rumours: King Charles ‘Dead’, Middleton 'Murdered', And BBC ‘Alert’ Fact Checked (msn.com) 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pellinore Posted March 18 #8 Share Posted March 18 51 minutes ago, Duke Wellington said: Russia first put it on their news yesterday that the King had died, but we have denied it. But a lot of news presenters are dressed in dark clothing, the flag at Buckingham Palace has been lowered to half mast, and we have just been told to expect a major announcement within 48 hours. Charlie is fine, but Kate may not be. The fake photo on Mothers' Day is highly suspect. She supposedly put out a Tweet that she, "like many others, use editing" and she is a keen photographer. But she didn't take that photo as she was in it, and the RF would have used professionals to present a photo for the media. It wasn't filtered (which is what was meant by 'many others using digital enhancements'), it was photoshopped, using several old photos. As Kate is the only Royal with public support (Andy is a paedo, Charlie a Net Zero hypocrite, Camilla a marriage wrecker, Harry a scoundrel, Meghan mixed race, William having an affair, and the rest expensive hangers on), they will be keeping any bad news about her health a secret as long as possible. The public's confidence in the superiority of the RF has been shaken since the passing of Elizabeth 11. They may find public funding will be pulled, as the public are realising that not only are they not better than most people, but they are also actually worse. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setton Posted March 18 #9 Share Posted March 18 What boring lives people must lead to obsess over this utter ****e. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pellinore Posted March 19 #10 Share Posted March 19 7 hours ago, Setton said: What boring lives people must lead to obsess over this utter ****e. They cost a fortune. The public own them, so of course they are interested in what they get up to. If they dropped out of public life and earned their own living, people would soon forget them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essan Posted March 19 #11 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 3 minutes ago, pellinore said: They cost a fortune. The public own them, so of course they are interested in what they get up to. If they dropped out of public life and earned their own living, people would soon forget them. Yes, President Boris would be much cheaper (and more popular around the globe) ...... PLus, if we got rid of the monarchy we could sell off all the Crown Estates to the Chinese. Just think how much money that'd bring in (for a year)..... Edited March 19 by Essan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pellinore Posted March 19 #12 Share Posted March 19 3 hours ago, Essan said: Yes, President Boris would be much cheaper (and more popular around the globe) ...... PLus, if we got rid of the monarchy we could sell off all the Crown Estates to the Chinese. Just think how much money that'd bring in (for a year)..... France makes more money from their Royalty (income from tourism) that Britain does, and they chopped their heads off years ago. The British RF hides its wealth- it wouldn't need to do that if it was value for money: How the British royal family hides its wealth from public scrutiny | Monarchy | The Guardian And as for parading Boris around the world- I'm all for it. He, Farage, Truss and Tice could be paraded around and people could pay to throw tomatoes at them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essan Posted March 19 #13 Share Posted March 19 18 minutes ago, pellinore said: And as for parading Boris around the world- I'm all for it. He, Farage, Truss and Tice could be paraded around and people could pay to throw tomatoes at them. I will concede that that could well be a lucrative money earner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted March 19 #14 Share Posted March 19 13 hours ago, susieice said: Kate was seen with William at a farm show on Saturday. So many rumors Yeah even this has become the subject of conspiracy theories with people on social media claiming that the footage does not show William and Kate. It's incredible how one photograph can cause such a PR nightmare for the royals. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pellinore Posted March 19 #15 Share Posted March 19 6 minutes ago, Saru said: Yeah even this has become the subject of conspiracy theories with people on social media claiming that the footage does not show William and Kate. It's incredible how one photograph can cause such a PR nightmare for the royals. Photoshopping a family portrait is at best manipulative, at worst an attempt to lie to the public. People have had enough of lies. And I am sure some people are just reTweeting the CTs just for fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essan Posted March 19 #16 Share Posted March 19 13 minutes ago, pellinore said: Photoshopping a family portrait is at best manipulative, at worst an attempt to lie to the public. Why? Apparently most people do it. Even I adjust contrast .... Are you saying only raw, unaltered, photos, should ever been issued? Might as well insist they use film and send them to Boot for processing as well! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandias Posted March 19 #17 Share Posted March 19 5 hours ago, pellinore said: They cost a fortune. The public own them, so of course they are interested in what they get up to. If they dropped out of public life and earned their own living, people would soon forget them. I don't think so, Pellinore. Royalist groupies always argue that the Windsors bring in more money than than they cost. On that basis, if true, the UK taxpayer is on to a good thing and the Royals are off the hook as a liability on the public purse. As clickbait, though, 'King Charles or Kate Deceased' is one hell of a headline! Personally, I find people's - and not just the people of the UK - silly obsession with royal trivia inexplicable. For most celebrities there is some justification for the interest they engender, they have talent or notoriety or whatever. What justifies the royals in this regard? Nothing, other than their accident of birth. As people they leave a lot to be desired and are hardly exemplary. I blame the media. I know nothing about the royals in other countries and only know about the Windsors because the media relentlessly shove them down my throat for attention. In my book, only gullible, impressionable dullards allow themselves to be hooked. Jesus, get a life! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted March 19 Author #18 Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, Ozymandias said: I don't think so, Pellinore. Royalist groupies always argue that the Windsors bring in more money than than they cost. On that basis, if true, the UK taxpayer is on to a good thing and the Royals are off the hook as a liability on the public purse. As clickbait, though, 'King Charles or Kate Deceased' is one hell of a headline! Personally, I find people's - and not just the people of the UK - silly obsession with royal trivia inexplicable. For most celebrities there is some justification for the interest they engender, they have talent or notoriety or whatever. What justifies the royals in this regard? Nothing, other than their accident of birth. As people they leave a lot to be desired and are hardly exemplary. I blame the media. I know nothing about the royals in other countries and only know about the Windsors because the media relentlessly shove them down my throat for attention. In my book, only gullible, impressionable dullards allow themselves to be hooked. Jesus, get a life! They are part of British history, identity, and culture. I just realised where your name comes from, that hunchback of Notre dame film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandias Posted March 19 #19 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Duke Wellington said: They are part of British history, identity, and culture. I just realised where your name comes from, that hunchback of Notre dame film. No, that was Quasimodo, a character in Victor Hugo's 'Hunchback of Notre-Dame', a French work. My moniker comes from Egypt via Greece and is part of British history, identity, and culture, being taken from Percy Bysshe Shelley's poem about the statue of the pharaoh Ramses II. The royals are part of British history, identity and culture, it is true, but are nothing to be proud of (in my view) and I fail to understand the soporific obsession people have with the minutiae of their privileged, and for the most part, decadent and self-indulgent lives. Edited March 19 by Ozymandias 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essan Posted March 19 #20 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Ozymandias said: I fail to understand the soporific obsession people have with the minutiae of their privileged, useless lives. Me too. And that applies equally with sportsmen, pop stars, actors and the myriad of Z list wannabees whom the public/media obsess over day and night these days. Doesn't anyone have their own lives to live any more? As an ex-RAF SAR pilot, William has my respect. But otherwise, what he and his (admittedly quite attractive) wife are doing, ranks, in terms of importance to my life, somewhere just below the discovery that a small hill in Scotland is 3 inches higher than previously thought. Edited March 19 by Essan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pellinore Posted March 19 #21 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 2 hours ago, Essan said: Why? Apparently most people do it. Even I adjust contrast .... Are you saying only raw, unaltered, photos, should ever been issued? Might as well insist they use film and send them to Boot for processing as well! The photo was sent out to the media to show they were a happy, healthy family in response to rumours of William's affair. It cobbled together images taken months, if not a year, ago. It was not enhanced, it was dishonest. The Ethics of Photo Retouching: An In-Depth Discussion | Cutting Edger Edited March 19 by pellinore 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pellinore Posted March 19 #22 Share Posted March 19 34 minutes ago, Duke Wellington said: I just realised where your name comes from, that hunchback of Notre dame film. There's no fooling you, is there? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pellinore Posted March 19 #23 Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, Ozymandias said: I don't think so, Pellinore. Royalist groupies always argue that the Windsors bring in more money than than they cost. On that basis, if true, the UK taxpayer is on to a good thing and the Royals are off the hook as a liability on the public purse. Republicans point out that the French has a lucrative royal tourist industry without having any royals. I don't think it right that they should own so much property, land, palaces and wealth and not have to disclose their income/expenditure. Charles was found on two occasions before he was king accepting a million pounds in cash in plastic bags. His supporters argued that as he never deals with cash, he thought it was a normal way to do business. Anyway, tourists come to see Buck House and the changing of the guard and the pomp and ceremony. They don't actually get to gawk at the royals at home. The tourist industry might bring in more of the public were allowed to visit Balmoral, Windsor Castle, and all the other palaces. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setton Posted March 19 #24 Share Posted March 19 2 hours ago, pellinore said: The photo was sent out to the media to show they were a happy, healthy family in response to rumours of William's affair. It cobbled together images taken months, if not a year, ago. It was not enhanced, it was dishonest. The Ethics of Photo Retouching: An In-Depth Discussion | Cutting Edger It was sent out instead of a current one because she's still recovering from surgery. Jeez, conspiracy theorists really need to recognise how insignificant their theories are to everyone else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+susieice Posted March 19 #25 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 2 hours ago, pellinore said: The photo was sent out to the media to show they were a happy, healthy family in response to rumours of William's affair. It cobbled together images taken months, if not a year, ago. It was not enhanced, it was dishonest. The Ethics of Photo Retouching: An In-Depth Discussion | Cutting Edger I took the time to google William's affair and that was debunked back in 2019. This is just something that will be brought up over and over as needed to fuel controversy. Same thing with that picture. Now social media is tearing up the video released yesterday of Kate and William at the farm show. Surprisingly, news media is reporting that it is real. Edited March 19 by susieice 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts