I had BBC News on with the sound off when that appeared; then it was just wall-to-wall Charles for an age. If not for the captions you'd have sworn the bugger had popped his clogs.Shadowknight":20qv87ju said:
Now today, from the BBC website (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-52044035) the Star, legendary for its political campaigning, leads with NHS heroes' fury over Chas test 'queue jump'. (I'm pleased to see that somebody there still knows how to use apostrophes.)
Much as I loathe the very sight of the man, I did have the tiniest smidge of sympathy for Donald Trump the other day when he was asked by a reporter if he thought it was fair that rich NBA stars and the like could get tests when others in far greater need couldn't. He said something like "That's just the way life works sometimes", for which he was pilloried for being insensitive. It goes without saying that he is indeed a massively insensitive dick with zero empathy; but he thing is, rightly or wrongly, of course rich people are going to jump queues in all walks of life, and it's naive and hopelessly utopian to think that it would ever be otherwise.
Anyway, being brutally pragmatic, it could be argued that 71-year-old Prince Charles' treatment (if required) and survival would be far more important to national morale than the death of a totally anonymous 71-year-old. He may not be the most popular royal by a long stretch, and I personally couldn't give a monkey's who "reigns over us", but we could all really do without the national weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth over a major royal's death in the midst of the current sh1tshow.