# Obama Not Invited to Royal Wedding



## dancingalone (Dec 19, 2010)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-reveal-invited-Prince-Williams-wedding.html

Somewhat amusing story.  I guess the special relationship is gone until the US gets a new prez.  Was it the iPod?


----------



## Big Don (Dec 19, 2010)

Meh, would probably have interfered with his golf game...


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Dec 19, 2010)

So whats the deal?
I thought the entire world wanted Obama as president...
They didnt like the Change after all either huh?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

It's not a State occasion, William isn't heir to the throne, just a prince so there's no need for the world to be at his wedding. As far as we've read and understood William wants what for the Royals is at least  a quiet wedding.
If it's true he's not invited it's not a snub at all. No point is getting your knickers in a twist as whoever was in the Oval office wouldn't have been invited, nothing to do with personalities.


----------



## Cryozombie (Dec 19, 2010)

Big deal, I wasn't invited either.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

Cryozombie said:


> Big deal, I wasn't invited either.


 

Me, neither but I'm hoping for a day off or a day off in lieu for it 

It's not a big deal tbh, I know that the tourist people are hoping for more visitors and the souvenir companies are hoping to have good sales around the world which has to be good in a rescession and peoples job but really it's not worth turning this into yet another anti Obama thread.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 19, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> It's not a State occasion, William isn't heir to the throne, just a prince so there's no need for the world to be at his wedding. As far as we've read and understood William wants what for the Royals is at least  a quiet wedding.
> If it's true he's not invited it's not a snub at all. No point is getting your knickers in a twist as whoever was in the Oval office wouldn't have been invited, nothing to do with personalities.



I disagree.  You are dissembling.  This would have been unimaginable even 10 years ago.  It's definitely a sign of the times and a repudiation of the special relationship from the British side.  On the other hand, Obama did it first, so certainly no one is calling foul on this side of the Atlantic.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 19, 2010)

Honestly chaps, you are reading things into this that are not there.

For a start, it has already been announced, at the time of their engagement, that because of the harsh economic times they did not feel that a massively lavish affair would be a sensitive move (of course, the royal houses idea of "not lavish" and mine will probably differ in scale ).

Also, this article seems to suggest that at least one member of the Presidential family has been invited:

http://www.icelebz.com/gossips/prin...ing_guest_list_includes_michelle_obama_diddy/


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 19, 2010)

Cryozombie said:


> Big deal, I wasn't invited either.


 
Got mine in the mail yesterday.  They registered at some wierd British store that I've never even heard of, so they're getting a gift card from Bed, Bath, and Beyond.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> I disagree. You are dissembling. This would have been unimaginable even 10 years ago. It's definitely a sign of the times and a repudiation of the special relationship from the British side. On the other hand, Obama did it first, so certainly no one is calling foul on this side of the Atlantic.


 

Prince William is not the heir to the throne therefore it's not a State occasion so William and Catherine can practically chose who they want to be there. They want as they said in this time of recession to have a relatively small wedding in line with the feeling of the country. It's nothing to do with America or it's president.
I do like the way though you as an American is telling me as a Brit how things are done here, somewhat amusing. William knows the country wouldn't be happy if they had a lavish wedding when so many are having to tighten their belts and losing their jobs, it's how good sense, he also has a good sense of himself as a person rather than as a commodity. After the wedding they will be living in a cottage near his RAF base, they will be living to all intents and purposes as 'normal' a life as it's possible to in his position.

Ten years ago we weren't in recession, there was money for these big occasions, there simply isn't now so to keep it low key but still make it special is the challenge for the couple. Looking back and seeing insult in the way things are being done now is simply silly.
If Obama had been invited and had gone people would still be on his back for expensive flights, entourage, leaving the country etc. Have you thought too that William may not want his wedding upstaged by heads of state especially the American one turning up with their huge entourages? What's wrong with him and Catherine wanting as personal a wedding as they can get?

This is a sign of the times, a sign of resession, hardship and tightening our belts, it's not a British repudiation of the 'special relationship. Try this for size instead and don't tell me the Brits repudiate the Americans again.

the American were coming to get a British Marine for casevac to hosptial, they were shot down and in the horrendous fire British Marines rushed to save the crew. they had no firefighting equipment suitable for this fire so doused themselves in water and went in the burning wreck. It took half an hour to get one American out, I saw him interviewed on television and he said they wouldn't give up on him as they struggled to free him, he said they just kept saying hang on, you're getting out. 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...s-tell-of-Black-Hawk-Down-rescue-mission.html

In bad times there is no USA or UK only 'us'. Don't make more of this no invite thing than there is, it's William and Catherine's wedding not a political event. Either be happy for them or ignore it.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 19, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> Honestly chaps, you are reading things into this that are not there.
> 
> For a start, it has already been announced, at the time of their engagement, that because of the harsh economic times they did not feel that a massively lavish affair would be a sensitive move (of course, the royal houses idea of "not lavish" and mine will probably differ in scale ).
> 
> ...



I'll withdraw my comment if Michelle Obama was indeed invited.  Thanks.


----------



## billc (Dec 19, 2010)

Let's be real for a moment.  If he wasn't invited to the wedding it is a big deal.  If he was invited and declined the invitation that is another thing.  Obama does not like the British people and they should just get used to that.  He continues to snub them and will continue snubbing them every chance he gets.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> Honestly chaps, you are reading things into this that are not there.
> 
> For a start, it has already been announced, at the time of their engagement, that because of the harsh economic times they did not feel that a massively lavish affair would be a sensitive move (*of course, the royal houses idea of "not lavish" and mine will probably differ in scale ).*
> 
> ...


 
I was thinking that too! Seems though  the Middleton family is chipping in as well and the pundits are saying the costs of the security etc will be outweighed by the money it brings in. Certainly hope so.
I doubt very much that America would be snubbed, the Ambassador will be invited to something associated with the wedding to make sure Americans and everyone else aren't left feeling they have been snubbed! We don't need the President to come over for every little thing, he and America have a high ranking ambassador here who is included in a lot of things British as a token of our friendship.


----------



## granfire (Dec 19, 2010)

LOL, they should elope! 

As American one should be happy that the pres isn't going out to party all the time...

But I think the Royals can't please anybody anyhow. So what the heck:

I ma sure there are vendors and suppliers that are moping because they are not picked or because the orders aren't as big. 
Naturally, they are being hated for having a big wedding. Compared to us regular folks.

And of course everybody wants to be on the guest list....

I keep forgetting that William is not - yet - heir to the throne...ole Chuck is still around...


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 19, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> I doubt very much that America would be snubbed, the Ambassador will be invited to something associated with the wedding to make sure Americans and everyone else aren't left feeling they have been snubbed! We don't need the President to come over for every little thing, he and America have a high ranking ambassador here who is included in a lot of things British as a token of our friendship.



In the article Suk posted, there's this little bit:  

"There's a lot of protocol involved - many heads of state and European royal families must be accounted for and included."

I guess the US head of state has already been accounted for.  No soup for Barack!  LOL.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> In the article Suk posted, there's this little bit:
> 
> "There's a lot of protocol involved - many heads of state and European royal families must be accounted for and included."
> 
> I guess the US head of state has already been accounted for. No soup for Barack! LOL.


 
The European Royal Families have to be invited they are all relatived, a lot of inbreeding there, hence the porphyria and haemophilia that is rife through all the families. The former disease is responsible for us losing and you gaining your country btw.

You don't have a head of state that is purely that unlike many countries, your head of state runs the country and is a political post. Many heads of state aren't a political position so can be invited without showing favour to any political view. Many of the other heads of state are from the Commonwealth countries, others are the responsibility of the UK and have the Queen as head of their country, not to invite them is not to invite relatives. As I said you have an ambassador to represent you anyway.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 19, 2010)

There is also the idea that the US Ambassador might present a more appropriate gift to the young couple, than say a set of dvds (coded for the wrong region) or a collection of speeches.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

Bob Hubbard said:


> There is also the idea that the US Ambassador might present a more appropriate gift to the young couple, than say a set of dvds (coded for the wrong region) or a collection of speeches.


 
He might even pay it out of his own pocket, save the tax payer money lol.


----------



## Big Don (Dec 19, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> "There's a lot of protocol involved - many heads of state and European royal families must be accounted for and included."


Many heads of state and European royal families are related by blood and marriage to the British Royal family, you have to invite family...


----------



## Bruno@MT (Dec 19, 2010)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> So whats the deal?
> I thought the entire world wanted Obama as president...
> They didnt like the Change after all either huh?



It would be more accurate to say that the world, on the whole, would rather have Obama / Biden than McCain / Palin.
That said, I don't know why Obama should fly over or be personally invited. That is what ambassadors are for.

As was explained in the article, William is not yet a crown prince, hence his wedding is not a state affair that requires or warrants the attendance of the President.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 19, 2010)

Bruno@MT said:


> As was explained in the article, William is not yet a crown prince, hence his wedding is not a state affair that requires or warrants the attendance of the President.



Will we see the French president there who I understand is his country's head of state?  Don't think Sarkozy (sp?) is related to the House of Windsor.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> Will we see the French president there who I understand is his country's head of state? Don't think Sarkozy (sp?) is related to the House of Windsor.


 

This really has you exercised hasn't it, no one actually cares who's invited and who's not. Are you looking to prove that the British are betraying the friendship?

However France is a fellow EU member which America isn't so who knows.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 19, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> This really has you exercised hasn't it, no one actually cares who's invited and who's not. Are you looking to prove that the British are betraying the friendship?
> 
> However France is a fellow EU member which America isn't so who knows.



Nope.  I don't really care about the invitation, although I do think not inviting the US prez would have been unthinkable even 10 years ago, regardless of all the camoflauge being thrown about it not being a state wedding, etc.  

I am primarily poking fun at Mr. Obama.  And I will amused if Nicolas Sarkozy is a guest of Willy's while our dear Leader is not.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> Nope. I don't really care about the invitation, although I do think not inviting the US prez would have been unthinkable even 10 years ago, regardless of all the camoflauge being thrown about it not being a state wedding, etc.
> 
> I am primarily poking fun at Mr. Obama. And I will amused if Nicolas Sarkozy is a guest of Willy's while our dear Leader is not.


 
Howevr is does sound as if you are getting at us and it's not Willy it's either HRH Prince William or Flt Lt. Wales to you.

Think what you want, you've been told by the Brits but of course you know better. Carry on making it sound like we've insulted you and ignore any recession we are going through.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 19, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Howevr is does sound as if you are getting at us and it's not Willy it's either HRH Prince William or Flt Lt. Wales to you.



No, ma'am. It is willy or baldy or any other name I prefer.  I'm afraid I do not serve at the leisure of the German house of Windsor.  



Tez3 said:


> Think what you want, you've been told by the Brits but of course you know better. Carry on making it sound like we've insulted you and ignore any recession we are going through.



I care not, Tez, how you choose to interpret my thread.  Accept my explanation or not.  It's all the same to me.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> No, ma'am. It is willy or baldy or any other name I prefer. I'm afraid I do not serve at the leisure of the German house of Windsor.
> 
> 
> 
> I care not, Tez, how you choose to interpret my thread. Accept my explanation or not. It's all the same to me.


 
So you have no respect for the fact he is a serviceman who does a dangerous life saving job, I see. I don't expect you to bow to his royal connections but you could use his military rank.
I'm supposed to accept your explanations but you won't accept mine or Sukerkin's?


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 19, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> So you have no respect for the fact he is a serviceman who does a dangerous life saving job, I see. I don't expect you to bow to his royal connections but you could use his military rank.



<shrugs> What does calling him Willy have to do with his military service?  I call an acquaintance of mine in the military Freddie instead of Frederick.  He's a colonel with actual combat experience in Vietnam.  If no one is bothered by my familiar tone with him, likewise no one on the Internet should be bothered by an American referring to a flight lieutenant in the British forces with meager experience as Willy.  

Fact is, you're actually framing an argument that Willy deserves deference thanks to his aristocratic pedigree rather than any status as a 'serviceman'.  Otherwise, we'd all be calling any service member by their titles rather than a familiar name.




Tez3 said:


> I'm supposed to accept your explanations but you won't accept mine or Sukerkin's?



Hmm, some poor logic here.  

I am telling you the purpose of MY thread which I created and therefore should know 100% all about it.  Meanwhile neither you nor Suk can know the same about the motives behind the royal wedding and the decision to not invite Mr. Obama, although you have offered your own opinions which match the explanations coming from the royal spokespersons.

In any case, we are free to either accept or not accept any offered explanation above.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> <shrugs> What does calling him Willy have to do with his military service? I call an acquaintance of mine in the military Freddie instead of Frederick. He's a colonel with actual combat experience in Vietnam. If no one is bothered by my familiar tone with him, likewise no one on the Internet should be bothered by an American referring to a flight lieutenant in the British forces with meager experience as Willy.
> 
> Fact is, you're actually framing an argument that Willy deserves deference thanks to his aristocratic pedigree rather than any status as a 'serviceman'. Otherwise, we'd all be calling any service member by their titles rather than a familiar name.
> 
> ...


 
Military titles? No, it's military rank and I call any service person I don't know personally by their rank and name.

You don't even know if Obama has been left off the list yet lol. It seems though this subject gets you quite hot under the collar, can't think why. It doesn't bother us.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 19, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Military titles? No, it's military rank and I call any service person I don't know personally by their rank and name.
> 
> You don't even know if Obama has been left off the list yet lol. It seems though this subject gets you quite hot under the collar, can't think why. It doesn't bother us.




Go away, Tez.  You're getting nutty on me, again.  And since I know your personality is such that you can't stop, I will.  Have the last word.

Anyone else, I'm game for more jabs, etc, at Willy or Dear Leader Barack.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> Go away, Tez. You're getting nutty on me, again. And since I know your personality is such that you can't stop, I will. Have the last word.
> 
> Anyone else, I'm game for more jabs, etc, at Willy or Dear Leader Barack.


 

You actually know little about my personality, not that I'd want you too lol!

You posted up in post no7 that it was a _repudiation by us_ of the special relationship we shared so you are obviously aggrieved that you think we have slighted you, all I can suggest is that you live with it.

I can't help it if my words get you upset dear boy and you feel you need to run away.
I post to amuse myself, I don't get upset at your slights to me. The message is don't attack the poster, attack the message so don't get so personal.


----------



## Ramirez (Dec 19, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Me, neither but I'm hoping for a day off or a day off in lieu for it



well if you do get an invite Tez, I'll be your date.


----------



## granfire (Dec 19, 2010)

ah, yes, weddings are so much fun everybody goes bunkers....


----------



## David43515 (Dec 19, 2010)

I think the problem on this thread is one of different cultures. The Brits seem to think it was brought up because it was percieved as an insult to America or our President. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think the Americans brought it up because after Obama`s bumbling of the gifts he gave HRH Queen Elizabeth (which were so conceited it makes even us cringe) and his early snubbing of the UK`s Ambassador......we just have to laugh at the image of Obama and retinue showing up and having a security guy look at him over his sunglasses and say "Sorry Buddy, you`re not on the list."

Yes he`s the elected leader of the country, yes he`s the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. However he`s also one of us, and at times we like to shake our heads and think of him as a jug-eared goofball.


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 19, 2010)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

PLEASE KEEP THE CONVERSATION POLITE AND RESPECTFUL.

This is the one and only warning that will be placed in this thread.  Personal attacks, national attacks and the rest will not be tolerated.

jks9199
Super Moderator
*


----------



## Mark Jordan (Dec 19, 2010)

Life still goes on and tomorrow promises to be a good one even after this snub.


----------



## David43515 (Dec 20, 2010)




----------



## Bruno@MT (Dec 20, 2010)

It's only natural for Sarkozy to be invited, neighboring country, fellow EU member, shared history and all that. And of course all the neighboring royals. If President Medvedev is not invited and the PM of China is not invited, then I don't think Americans should feel snubbed over Obama not being invited.

Of course, even if he was invited, I think Americans would feel snubbed over him not being seated at the table of honor, or over him not delivering the wedding speach, or whatever.

Btw about using titles and ranks...
My personal opinion is that you should only use them if you are in some way subject to them (in the broad sense of the word). I would not call Prince William 'Royal Highness', nor would I use his military rank when talking about him. I am not in the UK military so he is not my superior, and I am not a Brit so he is not my royal highness. 'Prince William' is as far as I'll go, and the major reason is that there are dozens of Williams, but if you say 'Prince William', everybody know whom you are talking about.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Dec 20, 2010)

David43515 said:


> I think the Americans brought it up because after Obama`s bumbling of the gifts he gave HRH Queen Elizabeth (which were so conceited it makes even us cringe).



That was indeed a feat of Palinesque proportions, and I cannot imagine how on earth he and his advisers managed to screw up so bad.


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 20, 2010)

Bruno@MT said:


> That was indeed a feat of Palinesque proportions, and I cannot imagine how on earth he and his advisers managed to screw up so bad.


 
I dunno, it's pretty easy to imagine for those of us who never bought into his unearned reputation for intelligence.


----------



## crushing (Dec 20, 2010)

Obama just isn't the lap dog to British power that Clinton/Bush were.  Can you imagine Clinton or Bush being strong enough to say, "Here are some damn DVDs, be happy you got that much!"


:angel:


----------



## Hudson69 (Dec 20, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> It's not a State occasion, William isn't heir to the throne, just a prince so there's no need for the world to be at his wedding. As far as we've read and understood William wants what for the Royals is at least  a quiet wedding.
> If it's true he's not invited it's not a snub at all. No point is getting your knickers in a twist as whoever was in the Oval office wouldn't have been invited, nothing to do with personalities.



I don't think it is so much that he is "just" a Prince or anyone getting bent over Obama not being able to attend as the surprise that one of the well liked royal personalities is getting married and an arrogant American politician is not getting to share the spotlight.  My .02 only and it doesn't count.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 20, 2010)

crushing said:


> Obama just isn't the lap dog to British power that Clinton/Bush were.  Can you imagine Clinton or Bush being strong enough to say, "Here are some damn DVDs, be happy you got that much!"
> 
> 
> :angel:



ROFLKLITA :tup:


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Dec 20, 2010)

lol these comments are funny to read..
people take this crap way to seriously..
Rich people kissing other rich peoples asses...
Royalty? no not in my eyes.
I doubt I will ever run into the family, but I would not bow or treat them any different then any other person I met. I will give a Doctor the respect of calling him Doctor since he earned the title, but these people were just born. I dont believe in royalty.
they are however extremely rich and poweful, and I do find it amusing how the entire world seemed to be all over the Obama bandwagon when he was running for president, but it seems nobody really wants him around now after the fact...
I wouldnt invite him to my wedding either... but then I wouldnt have invited Bush either..
seems alot to do about nothing.
Im sure I will read all kinds of super important headlines in the grocery stand checkout about how this is some huge consipracy against the "royals" or "Obama" or both in the tabloids... then I will make sure to come back here to get my facts straight...:shrug:


----------



## granfire (Dec 20, 2010)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> lol these comments are funny to read..
> people take this crap way to seriously..
> Rich people kissing other rich peoples asses...
> Royalty? no not in my eyes.
> ...



Actually, I think ole W could be fun at a party... 

but yeah, it's somewhere in the 'sack of rice in China' category for me as well...


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 20, 2010)

David43515 said:


> I think the problem on this thread is one of different cultures. The Brits seem to think it was brought up because it was percieved as an insult to America or our President. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think the Americans brought it up because after Obama`s bumbling of the gifts he gave HRH Queen Elizabeth (which were so conceited it makes even us cringe) and his early snubbing of the UK`s Ambassador......we just have to laugh at the image of Obama and retinue showing up and having a security guy look at him over his sunglasses and say "Sorry Buddy, you`re not on the list."
> 
> Yes he`s the elected leader of the country, yes he`s the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. However he`s also one of us, and at times we like to shake our heads and think of him as a jug-eared goofball.


 
I think you've hit the nail on the head here, the OP says Obama's been snubbed, he probably hasn't he's just not been invited but then again a lot of people haven't! 'Snubbing' though sounds as if it's blaming us for insulting America.
The British Ambassador will be an ex public schoolboy and snubbing him will mean nothing to him. You'll have to see what happens at public schools to understand a snub is nothing!
I imagine the Queen wouldn't mind some DVDs, she's had worse presents ...7kg of prawns, snail shells, Jaguars (the cat type) and sloths, the Canadians gave her 2 black beavers once. Anyway what _do _you give the richest woman in the world who has everything?


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 20, 2010)

Good lord, how hard to you have to kick somebody to-- oh.


----------



## pavlaras (Dec 20, 2010)

is not a state occassion


----------



## Big Don (Dec 20, 2010)

crushing said:


> Obama just isn't the lap dog to British power that Clinton/Bush were.  Can you imagine Clinton or Bush being strong enough to say, "Here are some damn DVDs, be happy you got that much!"
> 
> 
> :angel:


Yes, because being respectful and appropriate is the same as being a lapdog...
It isn't as if Clinton or Bush bowed to the Queen...


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 20, 2010)

Non British or Commonwealth people aren't expected to bow or curtsey to the Queen ( or any of the Royal family for that matter) at all. A handshake is all that's expected. There's no reason to, I suppose if they wanted to it would be alright but can't imagine why they would.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 20, 2010)

I can't imagine why they wouldn't, due deference is a requisite part of a polite society after all ... right along with being armed (but that's another story entirely ).

Now I am a Monarchist, which means that I take these things rather more seriously than many but, in case there is any lack of clarity on the matter, if someone insults our monarch (either directly or by deliberate omission) then they insult our country.  

Some people might not care about that but I wouldn't advise doing it within reach of any of our armed forces - they take their oath very diligently in the main.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 20, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> I can't imagine why they wouldn't, due deference is a requisite part of a polite society after all ... right along with being armed (but that's another story entirely ).
> 
> Now I am a Monarchist, which means that I take these things rather more seriously than many but, in case there is any lack of clarity on the matter, if someone insults our monarch (either directly or by deliberate omission) then they insult our country.
> 
> Some people might not care about that but I wouldn't advise doing it within reach of any of our armed forces - they take their oath very diligently in the main.


 
Why would *non* British or Commonwealth bow or curtsey? As long as they were polite ie shook hands and weren't rude I can't see a problem, they aren't expected by the Royal Family to to bow or curtsey so why would we expect them to?


----------



## Ken Morgan (Dec 20, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Non British or Commonwealth people aren't expected to bow or curtsey to the Queen ( or any of the Royal family for that matter) at all. A handshake is all that's expected. There's no reason to, I suppose if they wanted to it would be alright but can't imagine why they would.


 

I meet the Queen this past summer, we were told before hand that the bow is basically a head nod, so thats what I did. Head nod, and shake hands.

I bow more to my Sensei and classmates then I did to the Queen.

Whatever.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 21, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> Some people might not care about that but I wouldn't advise doing it within reach of any of our armed forces - they take their oath very diligently in the main.



Really?  Verbally insulting the British royalty would be sufficient grounds for your armed forces to take action?


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 21, 2010)

I think you misunderstand me, I don't mean 'action' as in 'war', I mean 'action' as in a bunch-of-fives up the bracket .  Of course I can only speak for the soldiers I know, which is a tiny sample of the whole.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 21, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> I think you misunderstand me, I don't mean 'action' as in 'war', I mean 'action' as in a bunch-of-fives up the bracket .  Of course I can only speak for the soldiers I know, which is a tiny sample of the whole.



Not sure what that expression means, but I'll take it to mean some roughhousing.  Soldiers will be soldiers.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 21, 2010)

The bunch of fives is your five fingers in a fist.
The British military swears it's oath of allegiance to the Sovereign not the government or any ministers so it would be a bit iffy insulting the Queen infront of the military.

Bowing and curtsying used to be more common than hand shaking when people met. It wasn't just an Eastern custom.


----------



## crushing (Dec 21, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> I think you misunderstand me, I don't mean 'action' as in 'war', I mean 'action' as in a bunch-of-fives up the bracket . Of course I can only speak for the soldiers I know, which is a tiny sample of the whole.


 
So a bunch-of-fives is a fist, that's good to know.  After googling I found that "up the bracket" basically means a punch in the throat, which is a relief.


----------



## billc (Dec 21, 2010)

An article at pajamasmedia about the Obama snubb.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/snubbed-no-obamas-at-britains-royal-wedding/


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 21, 2010)

Dammit, speak English.  Only, you know, less English-y.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 21, 2010)

CoryKS said:


> Dammit, speak English. Only, you know, less English-y.


 
Awright guvnor.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 21, 2010)

:chuckles:  Just wanted to show I can speak Colloquial as well as Posh .

As an aside, I am most glad it wasn't taken the wrong way :bows:


----------

