Prince Charles snubs war veteran.

a reply to: theMediator

Get out. What a load. Do you have anything at all to back that nonsense up? No I didn't think you did.

originally posted by: aboutface
a reply to: woodwardjnr

Before he waves him on, he puts both hands up in response to the vet's outstretched hand. And some day he hopes people will address him as his majesty? I'd like to know just where he displays that majesty. Then there's the word 'nobility'. Notice how neither of those applies to him?

Ahh, nobility, reminds me of a quote by Ernest Hemingway, "There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self." I think it is pretty self-evident that charles is just a candy-coated turd pretending to be nobility.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: nonspecific

Oh he's humorous. He just has to open his mouth.

Agreed, all his stuff is well documented, and most of it is frankly not for imitation unless you require your features to be rearranged.

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
Ahh, nobility, reminds me of a quote by Ernest Hemingway, "There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self." I think it is pretty self-evident that charles is just a candy-coated turd pretending to be nobility.
Cheers - Dave

LOL, you have a problem too! No cap for Charles..but a cap for-Dave!

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
Ahh, nobility, reminds me of a quote by Ernest Hemingway, "There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self." I think it is pretty self-evident that charles is just a candy-coated turd pretending to be nobility.
Cheers - Dave

LOL, you have a problem too! No cap for Charles..but a cap for-Dave!

I don't believe the names of things or candy-coated turds need to be capitalized.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: woodwardjnr

The clip is out of context. If you freeze on the clips opening wide shot you'll see there's a cue of veterans in wheelchairs going right around the parade square.

So if he shakes the hand of one, then he may feel obliged to shake them all.

Or, perhaps he's already shaken a lot of hands in the cue and has now had enough.

So if you'll gonna judge him, then don't do it on one single hand shake. Your judgement has to be based on the question, 'Should he shake every hand in the endless cue, or none.

For my money the lavish style his subjects afford him is reason for him to shake every single hand in this cue of veterans.

But if he doesn't then i won't judge him has harshly as many here whom are labouring under the misconception that it is just one handshake he's refused.

To this DAY, any mention of Charles makes me think of his "I want to be reincarnated as your tampon" quote, some 20-odd years ago.
One of the ickiest quotes of all time.

originally posted by: ColeYounger
To this DAY, any mention of Charles makes me think of his "I want to be reincarnated as your tampon" quote, some 20-odd years ago.
One of the ickiest quotes of all time.

Yuck, yuck, yuck, yuck! I presume that means Camilla needs be reincarnated as..Camillamine lotion. Still I suppose this is pooetry.

a reply to: McGinty

I thought that might be the case. Prince Charles and other royal family members have shaken more elderly veterans' hands than the general public have refused to yield a seat to on the bus.

The royal family is an important part of the social continuum in the UK and the Commonwealth. Are they faultless, blameless, sober and frugal, like the general public? Of course not, but then neither is the general public. The royals are just like us only more so.

I know it would be so much better if the head of state was just another political deal maker. I could identify with him then. I could say, "There goes a successful racketeer, like me."

a reply to: ColeYounger

Yeah, same here. It sadly has a way of sticking to one's mind. Ignominy, gross romanticism discredits him.

a reply to: woodwardjnr

Hello Woody,

You should have followed the link posted by the person who uploaded the video. It was a 'social experiment' to see how the media and people would react to a short video with little context. The uploader wrote this:

Of course, any eight second clip will hardly be a true reflection of actual events over say a 5 hour period but it has been quite interesting. If peoples perception of someone or something is negative the isolated clip will enrage them even further and all logic is thrown away.

I have no idea what Price Charles and his wife did during VE day marches as I didnt watch it and really I have no interest as I feel it is all manipulated to suit an agenda. History after all is written by the victorious.

I am guessing that Prince Charles spent time with some veterans but the 8 second clip should him up in a very bad light ad people jumped on this. Perhaps he did snub the old guy, the fact that it looks like him and his wife ushering the veteran on quickly in a patrionising manner does them no good at all.

This is how the media tell us their agenda. They make us feel bad or good about something and then follow it up constantly with sound bites to suit their agenda to reinforce the original idea. It is very easy to do - you only need to look at the comments on the video on youTube to see for yourself how effective this short experiment has been.

Trewsers link

Going off the sentiments and comments in this thread, Trewsers has some proof for his supposition.

a reply to: Kandinsky

True enough, but those few seconds revealed enough body language to show that he did not connect to the veteran who was trying to connect with him. The royal was on output and certainly not on intake in any way.

a reply to: aboutface

It's perception in my opinion. If you google 'Prince Charles war veterans,' there are hundreds of images of PC shaking hands with vets and attending Remembrance Day parades.

You're right to point out that he doesn't 'connect' with the vet in the clip. Do we know he didn't meet him later or maybe 'connected' later on? Let's say he didn't? Would that make the many occasions when he did irrelevant?

Trewsers has manipulated an emotive response from viewers and proven his contention. He's saying we project our prejudices on people (good or bad) and a lot of people have done just that off a few seconds of selective footage.

a reply to: Kandinsky

The occasions when he did connect are fine and were probably planned and written into his agenda, but this one time when he turned away from doing so is noticeable and yes quite important. Motherhood and apple pie: Outstanding veterans have been honoured in a special way, but it is unacceptable for any one ordinary veteran to be treated as irrelevant. The veteran would thus be (and was) singled out as unimportant. Let's hope he made up for it, but the particular moment does display a lack of being quick to action and thinking on his feet.