No 'Sir:' UK government denied Apple's Steve Jobs knighthood in 2009

13567

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 129
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by drdb View Post


    We would if we could think of one.



    lol... nice... tourism I guess but not sure why we need them for that, building would do fine and then we could charge people to go in them.
  • Reply 42 of 129
    paulmjohnsonpaulmjohnson Posts: 1,380member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    The role of Royalty is to be God's representative on Earth (that is the tradition anyway).



    I think you're mistaking them with the Pope!!!!
  • Reply 43 of 129
    stuffestuffe Posts: 394member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post


    Monaco. I’d estimate about half the world’s countries haven’t had a civil war. That doesnt’ mean they haven’t had civil unrest or overthrown the government, but I don’t that should be defined as a war.



    Touche, but it has had a revolution resulting in the end of absolute monarchy rule, and only 101 years ago at that.



    Vatican?
  • Reply 44 of 129
    stuffestuffe Posts: 394member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by diamondgeeza View Post


    Wish he would work harder to keep his mouth shut. Prince Charle's comments on nanotechnology and alternative medicine are enough to put science back 50-100 years alone. He's a muppet, admit it.



    I did already, he's a tit, but he's a tit because he's a tit, not just because he is Royalty.
  • Reply 45 of 129
    panupanu Posts: 135member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dr_lha View Post


    The Queen's role here, much like everything else she does, is entirely ceremonial.



    Among other things, the queen can veto any law in any Commonwealth country, she can dissolve parliament, which would come in handy if everything were hopelessly gridlocked, and since she has a long term of office, she advises prime ministers, providing for continuity in governance. In effect, she supervises the government, but steps in only when necessary. She appears ceremonial, but she does have real political power.
  • Reply 46 of 129
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post


    Well, a lot of the Royal Family can not be explained (the minor royals), but the Queen is head of state. Whilst the Americans choose to elect a head of state, we still have a hereditary one, which is really more in keeping with a system that doesn't have a written constitution.



    In practice, the head of state in the UK (and indeed a lot of other countries) is purely a ceremonial role, and she doesn't have anything to do with the legislative process (though in theory she can block legislation, if she did, it would probably be curtains for the monarchy).



    They provide a great benefit to our tourist industry, and at times of national crisis, they do act as something the country can rally behind. To be honest, I'd rather at the time of crisis we had a non-partisan royal speaking for us than the sort of partisan bickering that goes on whenever the US President speaks, but that's a matter of personal preference.







    Being a foreign citizen who gets a knighthood is similar to a foreign citizen being awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor (which Tony Blair, a man singularly unworthy of an award for honor) was given a few years ago. It's a way for a country to recognize the achievements of someone who has had an impact on their citizens, whether they are from that country or not.



    It's a shame this has had to immediately turn into a "my country is better than yours discussion". Knighting Steve Jobs would be a worthy way for the UK to note what he has done for technology, and it's a crying shame an idiot like Gordon Brown had to get in the way of it.



    hear hear
  • Reply 47 of 129
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stuffe View Post


    I did already, he's a tit, but he's a tit because he's a tit, not just because he is Royalty.



    lol yeah ok. But a hapless one. He can't help being inbred and stupid, comes with the territory...
  • Reply 48 of 129
    stuffestuffe Posts: 394member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stuffe View Post


    Name a country that hasn't had a Civil war



    I see I am going to have to amend this to name a country that is old enough to have gone through the various ages of society including a history that contains a feudal system of ruling that hasn't had a civil war or other revolution of some sort.



  • Reply 49 of 129
    shaun, ukshaun, uk Posts: 1,050member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post


    Well, a lot of the Royal Family can not be explained (the minor royals), but the Queen is head of state. Whilst the Americans choose to elect a head of state, we still have a hereditary one, which is really more in keeping with a system that doesn't have a written constitution.



    In practice, the head of state in the UK (and indeed a lot of other countries) is purely a ceremonial role, and she doesn't have anything to do with the legislative process (though in theory she can block legislation, if she did, it would probably be curtains for the monarchy).



    They provide a great benefit to our tourist industry, and at times of national crisis, they do act as something the country can rally behind. To be honest, I'd rather at the time of crisis we had a non-partisan royal speaking for us than the sort of partisan bickering that goes on whenever the US President speaks, but that's a matter of personal preference.







    Being a foreign citizen who gets a knighthood is similar to a foreign citizen being awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor (which Tony Blair, a man singularly unworthy of an award for honor) was given a few years ago. It's a way for a country to recognize the achievements of someone who has had an impact on their citizens, whether they are from that country or not.



    It's a shame this has had to immediately turn into a "my country is better than yours discussion". Knighting Steve Jobs would be a worthy way for the UK to note what he has done for technology, and it's a crying shame an idiot like Gordon Brown had to get in the way of it.



    Well said. Best post by far.
  • Reply 50 of 129
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stuffe View Post


    I did already, he's a tit, but he's a tit because he's a tit, not just because he is Royalty.



    A TIT is best defined by someone who preferred a dog like Camilla over Diana.



    This is our future Monarch...
  • Reply 51 of 129
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stuffe View Post


    History, heritage, tradition, the fact that we managed to keep our Monarchy and have them cede powers to parliament without needing a bloody revolution like we are seeing all over the world (less so these days, as there are less and less monarchies kicking around) should really make our system the envy of the world, not one for sneering at.



    Because they are faced with generic scorn over their place in the world, many have had to re-invent themselves with charitable work which is genuinely quite useful, so while I think Prince Charles is a tit, I know he works hard for a lot of things that I respect, so I respect him in turn.



    Plus, they earn us a boatload of income from Japs and Septics, and we get a wedding/coronation/jubilee every few years for a bonus day off work. The Civil List is worth if FOR THAT ALONE - awesome value for money.





    Nothing the British have ever done deserves envy.



    Prince Charles has a well funded department that does good things for him. Gives him a good name to the likes of you. He himself does nothing good for the world. Misunderstanding these people can be bad.
  • Reply 52 of 129
    stuffestuffe Posts: 394member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JackTheRat View Post


    A TIT is best defined by someone who preferred a dog like Camilla over Diana.



    This is our future Monarch...



    She was a tit too, in the end. Arguments for and against whether she was just a tit, or had tit-ness thrust upon her. Discuss! Actually, let's not?
  • Reply 53 of 129
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DarenDino View Post


    If Jobs was an illegal immigrant, he would have got his knighthood, benefits,a house, a car and job for life at the taxpayers expense.



    Right wing fundamentalist and Apple-lover? I know you don?t need to think to use a Mac, but you still need a brain.
  • Reply 54 of 129
    prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post


    And wasn?t the year this was suppose to happen, 2009, the same year Jobs was medical leave as a surviving cancer patient with deteriorating health unless he received a new liver? Unless being knighted gets you to the front of that list I think he cared less then than he does now.



    Interesting observation. This fits in with what we know about Gordon Brown in that it would mean he denied what would then be believed to be a dying man this honour, simply out of pique and general selfishness.



    To those Americans knocking the British Empire, a little respect would be nice. The British Empire ruled one third of the entire planet at it's height and there has never been nor is there likely to be a bigger empire ever. It's also as several have noted one of the few Empires that's fading away peacefully and quietly. They deserve a bit of respect.



    One day people will be talking about the USA in the self-same way and if you're around to see it it will be just as upsetting to you when people start dumping on how evil it was etc. Getting a knighthood is no different from those giant gold medals the President hands out once in a while.
  • Reply 55 of 129
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stuffe View Post


    She was a tit too, in the end. Arguments for and against whether she was just a tit, or had tit-ness thrust upon her. Discuss! Actually, let's not?



    Can we have an iTit award?
  • Reply 56 of 129
    stuffestuffe Posts: 394member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pmz View Post


    Nothing the British have ever done deserves envy.



    Prince Charles has a well funded department that does good things for him. Gives him a good name to the likes of you. He himself does nothing good for the world. Misunderstanding these people can be bad.



    Best. Sweeping. Generalisation. Ever!



    I disagree, but that's why God gave us minds
  • Reply 57 of 129
    stuffestuffe Posts: 394member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JackTheRat View Post


    Can we have an iTit award?



    Sarah Ferguson would win, hands down. Tits down?
  • Reply 58 of 129
    prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pmz View Post


    Nothing the British have ever done deserves envy ...



    This is just an astoundingly over the top insult. Why would you bother to say something like this?



    All British people are bad? Do you hate black people too? What about British black people?
  • Reply 59 of 129
    paulmjohnsonpaulmjohnson Posts: 1,380member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stuffe View Post


    Sarah Ferguson would win, hands down. Tits down?



    I don't know, after being good mates with Gaddafi's son and a paedo, Prince Andrew is a strong candidate for the tit of the year award!
  • Reply 60 of 129
    stuffestuffe Posts: 394member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    This is just an astoundingly over the top insult. Why would you bother to say something like this?



    All British people are bad? Do you hate black people too? What about British black people?



    Johnny Ive is a Brit, and frankly I am shocked, SHOCKED!, at the sheer ineptitude of his skills as a designer of gadgetry the world over seems to enjoy using on a daily basis I, for one, wish a Septic has got the job to design all this shit.
Sign In or Register to comment.