A couple of days ago, rehearsals took place for what will happen when the Queen dies. Apparently we are in for 10 days of state mourning.

Wikipedia says...‘Operation London Bridge’ is a codename that refers to the plan for what will happen in the days after the death of the Queen.

10 days of being bombarded with TV programmes about the Queen’s life. And then further TV coverage as Charles is crowned.

Now the Queen has been fabulous and flawless in her duties....but 10 days, really?

Long live the queen

I think we had about ten f*****g years when Diana
went belly up.

The Thais had a year of mourning when their King died.....

A day for each decade. Might go up to eleven!

I remember as a young man, working for BT, there was a similar code named operation for the Duke of Windsor.

I used to process stuff relating to the Queen's Flight, at RAF Benson, in Oxfordshire.

Name just came to me.... Operation Vague.

Paying ones respect for our long reigning monarch the queen is right and understood but I do hope it doesn’t go on to long.

I’m dreading this remember when Diana died? It just went on to long.

I think we were due to play Chesterfield at the weekend but games were postponed, I don’t mind a couple of days but much more is just to much for me and a lot of other people.

It’s natural that these memories brought back by these public deaths of royalty for the rest of us are also painful so it all gets put together in a sort of joint national mourning.

I do hope our Queen stays as healthy as she can for years to come.

Looking forward to a few bank holidays

Im a Republican, and live abroad. So meh, tbh. It will be sad, as she'd someones mum, gran etc, but i'll pay her the same respect as anyone else i hardly knew

This is a good read on the subject. I'm no royalist but found it fascinating.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... don-bridge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-u5nd2GqNE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; is an interesting watch on the subject.

Will it knowck Corras off the screen?//

ZizkovClaret wrote:Im a Republican, and live abroad. So meh, tbh. It will be sad, as she'd someones mum, gran etc, but i'll pay her the same respect as anyone else i hardly knew

Same here, no mourning and no attention seeking celebration either. Just another old lady I didn't know passing away.

There won't be 10 days of national mourning when my nan dies and she's worked twice as hard for next to no reward her whole life.

I’ll treat it like the death of Diana Spencer and largely ignore it.

Lord Beamish wrote:I’ll treat it like the death of Diana Spencer and largely ignore it.

That’s the point I was making in post 6 LD but you may not be able to ignore it like the rest of the country to some extent.

sculptureofman wrote:This is a good read on the subject. I'm no royalist but found it fascinating.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... don-bridge

re, George V

Dawson injected the king with 750mg of morphine and a gram of cocaine – enough to kill him twice over – in order to ease the monarch’s suffering, and to have him expire in time for the printing presses of the Times, which rolled at midnight.

Crikey! "Sorry, your Maj, the printing presses are waiting"

sculptureofman wrote:This is a good read on the subject. I'm no royalist but found it fascinating.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... don-bridge

It is a v interesting piece.
I already knew about this, but just imagine the reaction nowadays, if her doctors were to deliberately kill her as they did to her grandfather, (for the dubious reason of getting the news into the upmarket daily papers!)
Personally I'm not against euthanasia, but the legal position is pretty clear.

If they do this and declare holidays then I hope we bloody well get paid. 10 days??? What if you don't want to mourn? What if, other than it being the death of just another human being which is always sad, you just don't really care? The Queen and her family mean nothing to me. Death is always sad for someone but the collective grief over Diana's death was stupid in the extreme, people crying for someone they never knew and never would. Why do people want to live their lives by proxy and get upset when things like this happens? I get far more upset when the Israelis kill Palestinian children.

Lord Beamish wrote:I’ll treat it like the death of Diana Spencer and largely ignore it.

The terrestrial TV and radio stations, both commercial and publicly owned (BBC and C4) will have normal programming closed down for the whole 10 days. SKY, Virgin Media and BT may well fall foul of this legislation too as they are UK based. Which could leave those who have VPN as the only people who will be able to interact with anything outside the UK!

houseboy wrote:If they do this and declare holidays then I hope we bloody well get paid. 10 days??? What if you don't want to mourn? What if, other than it being the death of just another human being which is always sad, you just don't really care? The Queen and her family mean nothing to me. Death is always sad for someone but the collective grief over Diana's death was stupid in the extreme, people crying for someone they never knew and never would. Why do people want to live their lives by proxy and get upset when things like this happens? I get far more upset when the Israelis kill Palestinian children.

Re your last two lines it’s because some people’s personal memory’s are still very raw and can in some circumstances last to ones dying days.

Different peoples “emotions” can and will be triggered by public deaths where as other people are more able to separate the two.

South West Claret. wrote:Re your last two lines it’s because some people’s personal memory’s are still very raw and can in some circumstances last to ones dying days.

Different peoples “emotions” can and will be triggered by public deaths where as other people are more able to separate the two.

Very true but by that same token people will need to build a bridge, for the vast majority life will continue as it was before with hardly any change.

South West Claret. wrote:Re your last two lines it’s because some people’s personal memory’s are still very raw and can in some circumstances last to ones dying days.

Different peoples “emotions” can and will be triggered by public deaths where as other people are more able to separate the two.

I think you are right bud but I also think it's something other as well. Mass grief is, I think, contagious and people often get caught up in it because it is 'the thing to do'. It's almost as if people see others crying with grief and get caught up in it and the whole thing is like a snowball effect. I often wonder how many of the millions were genuinely upset by Diana's death and how many were just following an acquired behaviour.
Maybe we'll never know but the contrast with the Queen's death will be interesting psychologically. Diana was young and had a full life ahead of her but the Queen is old and her death should come as no shock or surprise, which makes me wonder if she will actually be mourned as heavily.
I will watch that side of it with interest.

What happens if the Queen dies on the day of the World Cup final, one which England are competing in?

Do the England team fly home, awarding the game to the opposition? Imagine that.

LoveCurryPies wrote:re, George V

Dawson injected the king with 750mg of morphine and a gram of cocaine – enough to kill him twice over – in order to ease the monarch’s suffering, and to have him expire in time for the printing presses of the Times, which rolled at midnight.

I can believe in a doctor who would overdoes a patient to ease him to death, though I know of others who wouldn't.

But I don't believe in a doctor who would time the injection to the newpaper schedules; I don't believe in a doctor who would know or care enough about newspaper schedules to do that anyway; I don't believe in a conspiracy where any palace or newspaper official would approach a doctor to suggest he do that. And I don't believe in a doctor who would be fool enough to say so.

In any case, newspapers of the day were perfectly capable of running and distributing special editions.

Something I do believe in, is the ability of people (including journalists) to hear an urban myth on the internet and decide that that's a fun tale, let's run with it, no need to check whether it is true, all the people are dead so there's no law of libel. So unless anyone has any viable evidence of the truth, then I don't believe it.

On that day though we will be part of history, the longest serving monarch. It will be a period of reflection on her life and do we need to maintain the monarchy as it is now.
I am not an avid royalist by any means but the thought of a Donald Trump as head of state frightens me.

2018 and there’s still a monarchy, amazing.

joey13 wrote:2018 and there’s still a monarchy, amazing.

And if you liked that hot-take, you're going to love the RATM poster I've just put up in the common room.

Imagine the sheer volume of bad news this government would try to bury in the subsequent few days if the Queen dies on their watch. We'd be living in a post-apocalyptic wasteland before the weekend, surviving only on bottled crocodile tears and the hope that the commemorative tea towel industry can support us all until St Jeremy rides in on his unicorn to save the day.

Lets hope that there isn't an event that actually brings down London Bridge and then the comms teams across the world actually do get their wires crossed...

houseboy wrote:I think you are right bud but I also think it's something other as well. Mass grief is, I think, contagious and people often get caught up in it because it is 'the thing to do'. It's almost as if people see others crying with grief and get caught up in it and the whole thing is like a snowball effect. I often wonder how many of the millions were genuinely upset by Diana's death and how many were just following an acquired behaviour.
Maybe we'll never know but the contrast with the Queen's death will be interesting psychologically. Diana was young and had a full life ahead of her but the Queen is old and her death should come as no shock or surprise, which makes me wonder if she will actually be mourned as heavily.
I will watch that side of it with interest.

Point taken yes HB also the “unconscious” and “conscious” emotions taking over at that time.

Neuroscience is a fascinating subject.

I thought this thread maybe about the reissue of a Smiths album.....

I will pay my respects and don't give a flying what anyone else thinks

I have to admit that I spent 4 years 1973-1977 hoping that she'd croak, but I'd have thought that the worry would not so much be about her dying, but what would happen if she got dementia. It's easy enough to pretend that being in a drunken stupor is a "fishbone caught in a throat", but you don't tend to sober up from dementia.

Anyhow, how many days off do we get with mourning bank holidays? That's the key issue here, I think. And if she dies in a miserable month, could she have an "official death day" so that we can celebrate it in the sunshine?

timshorts wrote:Anyhow, how many days off do we get with mourning bank holidays? That's the key issue here, I think. And if she dies in a miserable month, could she have an "official death day" so that we can celebrate it in the sunshine?

You've just got to hope that she doesn't cark it during the CO2 crisis otherwise you're going to have to drink naturally carbonated drinks like champagne.

South West Claret. wrote:Point taken yes HB also the “unconscious” and “conscious” emotions taking over at that time.

Neuroscience is a fascinating subject.

I have some interesting conversations at home, my wife holds a degree in psychology and works with people with learning difficulties. She knows quite a bit about acquired behaviour and psychological triggers. As you say, fascinating.

Bacchus wrote:Imagine the sheer volume of bad news this government would try to bury in the subsequent few days if the Queen dies on their watch. We'd be living in a post-apocalyptic wasteland before the weekend, surviving only on bottled crocodile tears and the hope that the commemorative tea towel industry can support us all until St Jeremy rides in on his unicorn to save the day.

You are so right I even wonder if you know how right you are, what a golden opportunity for pushing some highly dubious measures through parliament, not to mention maybe some worrying economic figures. It would be God's gift to government.

houseboy wrote:You are so right I even wonder if you know how right you are, what a golden opportunity for pushing some highly dubious measures through parliament, not to mention maybe some worrying economic figures. It would be God's gift to government.

Parliament won''t be sitting.

So basically a dress rehearsal for when our Sean leaves us?

dsr wrote:Parliament won''t be sitting.

I realise this but the whole thing will go on long after parliament returns. I can see the media, encouraged by government, dragging this out for months. The media love bad news, they thrive on it, and government love anything, good or bad, that makes things 'disappear', the same will happen if England were to win the World Cup. Governments all over the world, ours included, love the art of deflection.

It will be incredibly dull, for sure.

But we must be braced for the dullness and take it as we British should do.

Why do we need all this codeword nonsense. How about the queens ill, correction, now she's dead, oh and that weirdo Charles is now king. That should do it.

I applaud her madge for a long and sometimes glorious reign,but 10 days of national mourning really!.

Comparisons to Diane are irrelevant Diane was "killed" at a young age 37 and left two young boys motherless,OK i know they have luxuries most of us can only imagine,but to lose a parent in such circumstances must leave a mental scar whoever you are.

Personally i didn't join in the media circus for the people's princess,i can't even recall if i watched the funeral coverage,i may have seen snippets of news bulletins.

Sure it will be a sad moment when the Queen pop her clogs but she has had a good innings,and leaves the Royal Family in rude health.
A much more interesting scenario will involve whether Charlie boy becomes King and how the public react to him and Camilla,he will have to tread carefully in the early months,like Phil the Greek though tact has never been his strong point.

If i was taking bets i'd wager Liz will outlast the current Prime Minister anyway.

tiger76 wrote:I applaud her madge for a long and sometimes glorious reign,but 10 days of national mourning really!.

Comparisons to Diane are irrelevant Diane was "killed" at a young age 37 and left two young boys motherless,OK i know they have luxuries most of us can only imagine,but to lose a parent in such circumstances must leave a mental scar whoever you are.

Personally i didn't join in the media circus for the people's princess,i can't even recall if i watched the funeral coverage,i may have seen snippets of news bulletins.

Sure it will be a sad moment when the Queen pop her clogs but she has had a good innings,and leaves the Royal Family in rude health.
A much more interesting scenario will involve whether Charlie boy becomes King and how the public react to him and Camilla,he will have to tread carefully in the early months,like Phil the Greek though tact has never been his strong point.

If i was taking bets i'd wager Liz will outlast the current Prime Minister anyway.

It’s Diana and she wasn’t killed. If Dodi and Diana had worn seat belts on they would have been alive. If the driver hadn’t been driving like a lunatic, there wouldn’t have been a crash. Worse case scenario some paps would have got a few photos. In the end they got a huge story.

It’s the 21st Anniversary of Dead Di and Dodi Day, this year, isn’t it?
Cor blimey! How time flies.

dsr wrote:I can believe in a doctor who would overdoes a patient to ease him to death, though I know of others who wouldn't.

But I don't believe in a doctor who would time the injection to the newpaper schedules; I don't believe in a doctor who would know or care enough about newspaper schedules to do that anyway; I don't believe in a conspiracy where any palace or newspaper official would approach a doctor to suggest he do that. And I don't believe in a doctor who would be fool enough to say so.

In any case, newspapers of the day were perfectly capable of running and distributing special editions.

Something I do believe in, is the ability of people (including journalists) to hear an urban myth on the internet and decide that that's a fun tale, let's run with it, no need to check whether it is true, all the people are dead so there's no law of libel. So unless anyone has any viable evidence of the truth, then I don't believe it.

I think that you need to do some proper research on this. It's not just rumour and speculation. The full truth was revealed in 1986, (i.e. 50 years after his death), and was widely publicised.
There are lots of sources for this, but here's the New York times report

The New York Times Archives

As he lay comatose on his deathbed in 1936, King George V was injected with fatal doses of morphine and cocaine to assure him a painless death in time, according to his physician's notes, for the announcement to be carried ''in the morning papers rather than the less appropriate evening journals.''

The fact that the death of a reigning monarch had been medically hastened remained a secret for half a century until the publication today of the notes made at the time by Lord Dawson, the royal physician who recorded that he administered the two injections at about 11 o'clock on the night of Jan. 20, 1936. That was scarcely an hour and a half after Lord Dawson had written a classically brief medical bulletin that declared, ''The King's life is moving peacefully toward its close.''

That ''close'' came in less than an hour after the injections. Lord Dawson, according to his notes, had already taken the precaution of phoning his wife in London to ask that she ''advise The Times to hold back publication.''

And to quote from Dawson's diary for January 20, 1936, (which was never published, so he had no need to exaggerate or sensationalise):

“At about 11 o’clock it was evident that the last stage might endure for many hours, unknown to the patient but little comporting with the dignity and serenity which he so richly merited and which demanded a brief final scene. Hours of waiting just for the mechanical end when all that is really life has departed only exhausts the onlookers and keeps them so strained that they cannot avail themselves of the solace of thought, communion or prayer. I therefore decided to determine the end and injected (myself) morphia gr. 3/4 and shortly afterwards cocaine gr. 1 into the distended jugular vein.”

The Thais had ten years of mourning when Rex Harrison died? In that climate, I'd bet you he was good and ripe by then.

nil_desperandum wrote:I think that you need to do some proper research on this. It's not just rumour and speculation. The full truth was revealed in 1986, (i.e. 50 years after his death), and was widely publicised.
There are lots of sources for this, but here's the New York times report

The New York Times Archives

And to quote from Dawson's diary for January 20, 1936, (which was never published, so he had no need to exaggerate or sensationalise):

Pretty much what I said. The king was killed by a lethal injection from his doctor - I was always willing to believe that - but it wasn't done to fit in with newspaper schedules.

10 days of mourning ISN'T ten days off work..

Does anyone REALLY think that????

Fahooks sake....

Spijed wrote:What happens if the Queen dies on the day of the World Cup final, one which England are competing in?

Do the England team fly home, awarding the game to the opposition? Imagine that.

No they sing God save the King instead.

dsr wrote:Pretty much what I said. The king was killed by a lethal injection from his doctor - I was always willing to believe that - but it wasn't done to fit in with newspaper schedules.

As I said in my previous post there's a lot of evidence suggesting that it was - and not just the word of those who were present.
e.g. It is very well documented that King had an extremely dim view of the afternoon press and was strategic in developing close relations with The Times. He even had direct phone line installed to the offices of The Times so that they would be the first to receive news from the Palace, and he also sent advance copies of his speeches to their editor so that they would appear in print there first.
I'm sure that George V didn't actually ask them to kill him at a time convenient for "The Times", but the Royal household, his aids, his family and his doctor were well aware of his antipathy for the afternoon press, and his relationship with "The Times", so it is not far-fetched at all to believe his doctor's version of events that says they warned The Times to hold up the print deadline in order to be the first to announce his death. (It is what the King would have wanted - though this doesn't defend it.)