Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Has the Queen died?

I can't help thinking we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves on this thread. Many old women, as their health deteriorates, will move out of their house and go to live in a home where they're cared for and don't have do any menial chores.
 
I can't help thinking we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves on this thread. Many old women people, as their health deteriorates, will move out of their house and go to live in a home where they're cared for and don't have do any menial chores.
FTFY
 
Operation London Bridge: the secret plan for the days after the Queen’s death

Just so you are aware of the protocol people. If it turns out to be accurate, I may just end it all myself rather than have to tolerate it

Interesting that Britain was really shit at pageantry until relatively recently.

At the funeral of Princess Charlotte, in 1817, the undertakers were drunk. Ten years later, St George’s Chapel was so cold during the burial of the Duke of York that George Canning, the foreign secretary, contracted rheumatic fever and the bishop of London died. “We never saw so motley, so rude, so ill-managed a body of persons,” reported the Times on the funeral of George IV, in 1830.

I don't know where the best place to go for a holiday to escape all the royal mourning nonsense might be - Ireland? Argentina? The South Pacific?
 
What are the technical challenges involved in broadcasting a pirate radio signal strong enough to overpower the BBC? Just an idle thought of a quiet Thursday morning.

2a10f35769ca15bf56108a751c19192568902d9efdbbf023a92940c91b139489.jpg
 
Geidt will contact the prime minister. The last time a British monarch died, 65 years ago, the demise of George VI was conveyed in a code word, “Hyde Park Corner”, to Buckingham Palace, to prevent switchboard operators from finding out. For Elizabeth II, the plan for what happens next is known as “London Bridge.” The prime minister will be woken, if she is not already awake, and civil servants will say “London Bridge is down” on secure lines. From the Foreign Office’s Global Response Centre, at an undisclosed location in the capital, the news will go out to the 15 governments outside the UK where the Queen is also the head of state, and the 36 other nations of the Commonwealth for whom she has served as a symbolic figurehead – a face familiar in dreams and the untidy drawings of a billion schoolchildren – since the dawn of the atomic age.


Um. you just gave it away guys.
 
What are the technical challenges involved in broadcasting a pirate radio signal strong enough to overpower the BBC? Just an idle thought of a quiet Thursday morning.

I'd actually quite like to hear a proper, old-school BBC interruption of procedures type thing. Not that I'd be watching/listening at the time I suppose... And it would be nice if it was followed by a proper, old-skool, junglist version.
 
Sam Knight said:
For a time, she will be gone without our knowing it. The information will travel like the compressional wave ahead of an earthquake, detectable only by special equipment.

Christ, someone's told him: this is the 'Long Read', right? Make it really, really, long.
 
What are the technical challenges involved in broadcasting a pirate radio signal strong enough to overpower the BBC? Just an idle thought of a quiet Thursday morning.

You would need really fucking massive transmitters on big towers, spread throughout the country, I reckon?
 
NoXion said:
Yeah, seriously. What's with the fucking servile tone?

I've read the whole thing. I'm a historian, and felt compelled to do that.

Revolting. And, yes, all that many-day-long arselicking that's predicted for 201?/202? will be vile.

However nauseating all that information was though, and it was, why can't people grasp that it's useful information?

For fucking shit up :) on Smiths Day, as we could and should call it :cool: :D

it's the guardian

Fuck knows who Sam Knight is, some poshboy no doubt. But exactly because he seems to be some very establishment-friendly dig-deeper, he looks like he's managed to get hold of that information by means of a lot of off the record interviews.

I don't like that sort of 'sources close to' shite myself, but not all of it is baseless speculation surely.

And it's not (principally ;) ) the Guardian being servile anyway -- look at the people being reported by that article.

And look at all the so called 'traditional' kerfuffle being pre-organised around Her Maj's prospective arselickfest. What would you rather they did? Ignore it and all the ridiculous flummery and historical bollocksness? Like the Independent ignored UK royalty for a few months when they first started?

All this propective ultra-servility is being reported by the Guardian.

But plenty of its readers are not royalty-worshippers in any shape or form.
 
Back
Top Bottom