Originally Posted by SallyRand

A revolution was fought and won to rid the American people of the tyranny of the British "Royal" family, so I fail to understand the apparent fascination with the antics of that whole lot!

Originally Posted by SallyRand

Why is a wedding of a member of a family which "earns" its living from inheirited wealth derived from the backbreaking labor of and the theft of properties, money and freedom from its "subjects" the object of adoration, interest and delight?

Originally Posted by SallyRand

A revolution was fought and won to rid the American people of the tyranny of the British "Royal" family, so I fail to understand the apparent fascination with the antics of that whole lot!

The so-called "Royal Couple" are the foremost representatives of one of the most repressive, totalitarian and brutal empires in the history of the world and during Worlld War One, that same family even changed its names to be more acceptable as the King of England had gone to war with his COUSIN, the German Kaiser, which war was then joined by yet ANOTHER cousin, Nicholas, Czar of All The Russias!

"Just as children can take their surnames from their father, so sovereigns normally take the name of their 'House' from their father. For this reason, Queen Victoria's eldest son Edward VII belonged to the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (the family name of his father Prince Albert). Edward VII's son George V became the second king of that dynasty when he succeeded to the throne in 1910.

In 1917, there was a radical change, when George V specifically adopted Windsor, not only as the name of the 'House' or dynasty, but also as the surname of his family. The family name was changed as a result of anti-German feeling during the First World War, and the name Windsor was adopted after the Castle of the same name.

At a meeting of the Privy Council on 17 July 1917, George V declared that 'all descendants in the male line of Queen Victoria, who are subjects of these realms, other than female descendants who marry or who have married, shall bear the name of Windsor'."

"Unless The Prince of Wales chooses to alter the present decisions when he becomes king, he will continue to be of the House of Windsor and his grandchildren will use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor."

"The Mountbatten surname derives from the German town of Battenberg, in Hesse. Prince Louis of Battenberg changed his surname to Mountbatten (its literal English translation) during the First World War at the request of King George V. When then-Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark, a member of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg (the royal house of Denmark and Norway and the deposed royal house of Greece) took British citizenship, he used this surname since he descends from the Battenberg family through his mother, Princess Alice of Battenberg.

The name Windsor was adopted by the British branch of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha in 1917."

"Prince" Phillip is Greek, by the way.

Why is a wedding of a member of a family which "earns" its living from inheirited wealth derived from the backbreaking labor of and the theft of properties, money and freedom from its "subjects" the object of adoration, interest and delight?

Originally Posted by DBS.US

Because people with no lives have to believe they are part of something going on.

Originally Posted by SallyRand

Over 300 AMERICANS dead in storms in the USA and the top story in the media is the coverage of a wedding between an effete British snob and a gold digger.

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2011/...ex.html?hpt=T2

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/04/29/tor...ex.html?hpt=T2

No wonder the USA is in such pitiable condition!

Originally Posted by Evil Chris

Japan, Haiti, Libya, oh and that little leak in the Gulf? Well, those stories just aren't as interesting anymore.