Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: mudflap on 26 June 2010, 07:34:10
-
The Law wins over common sense..? :(
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/developer+wins+prince+charles+barracks+battle/3691197
(http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i247/mysticfred/25_chelsea2_x.jpg)
-
He did, they wont build it now. It's just a case of how much compensation the developers want >:(
-
Nice trees, but what are those half finished tower blocks doing there?
Who knows, another will soon crop up somewhere :(
-
I think Charlie is right, the new building look awful ::)
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
-
Phew!! I thought you were referring to the Dutchess of Cornwall(http://planetsmilies.net/shocked-smiley-9448.gif) (http://planetsmilies.net)(http://planetsmilies.net/shocked-smiley-9448.gif) (http://planetsmilies.net)
-
Yes, fully behind Prince Charles comments on this one :y :y
Those building would have looked awful if they had of been built. ;) ;)
-
Hummm, design looks very similar to Chiswick Park, think that looks ok.... lets face it would you rather have the waste land & 60's monstrosity that is currently there?
(Streetview)
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Chelsea+Barracks&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=19.385722,39.506836&ie=UTF8&hq=Chelsea+Barracks&hnear=&ll=51.487543,-0.153229&spn=0,0.01929&z=16&layer=c&cbll=51.487665,-0.152691&panoid=qqHGm10xoOpnQu_a1U8WGg&cbp=12,21.56,,0,4.32
In times of massive cut backs, bound to be waste land for some years to come now :(
I've seen far worse developments!
-
Phew!! I thought your were referring to the Dutchess of Cornwall(http://planetsmilies.net/shocked-smiley-9448.gif) (http://planetsmilies.net)(http://planetsmilies.net/shocked-smiley-9448.gif) (http://planetsmilies.net)
No comment ...... must resist ...RESIST .....
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
I agree with what you say E - mostly.
Although I have to be careful what I say in these matters I would suggest that the Prince of Wales is quite adept in using his established position to motivate commoners to follow his line of thinking - as was his late wife.
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
I agree with what you say E - mostly.
Although I have to be careful what I say in these matters I would suggest that the Prince of Wales is quite adept in using his established position to motivate commoners to follow his line of thinking - as was his late wife.
Along Zulu with a previous Prince of Wales, who would later become Edward VII :y :y :y
This is one thing that any Prince of Wales can do very successfully; have opinions and influence 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
I agree with what you say E - mostly.
Although I have to be careful what I say in these matters I would suggest that the Prince of Wales is quite adept in using his established position to motivate commoners to follow his line of thinking - as was his late wife.
Along Zulu with a previous Prince of Wales, who would later become Edward VII :y :y :y
This is one thing that any Prince of Wales can do very successfully; have opinions and influence 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)
previous Prince of Wales
Strangely enough E, I posted the report an hour or so ago concerning another former occupant of that position and his abdication notice, as read on the BBC by Alvar Liddell 8-) Spooky or what?
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc7FcrOwWjQ&feature=player_embedded[/media]
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
I agree with what you say E - mostly.
Although I have to be careful what I say in these matters I would suggest that the Prince of Wales is quite adept in using his established position to motivate commoners to follow his line of thinking - as was his late wife.
Along Zulu with a previous Prince of Wales, who would later become Edward VII :y :y :y
This is one thing that any Prince of Wales can do very successfully; have opinions and influence 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)
previous Prince of Wales
Strangely enough E, I posted the report an hour or so ago concerning another former occupant of that position and his abdication notice, as read on the BBC by Alvar Liddell 8-) Spooky or what?
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc7FcrOwWjQ&feature=player_embedded[/media]
Indeed as I didn't manage to yet get around to listening to that broadcast!! :-[ :-[ :-[ :D ;)
I was of course just working on historical knowledge :D :D ;)
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
I agree with what you say E - mostly.
Although I have to be careful what I say in these matters I would suggest that the Prince of Wales is quite adept in using his established position to motivate commoners to follow his line of thinking - as was his late wife.
Along Zulu with a previous Prince of Wales, who would later become Edward VII :y :y :y
This is one thing that any Prince of Wales can do very successfully; have opinions and influence 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)
previous Prince of Wales
Strangely enough E, I posted the report an hour or so ago concerning another former occupant of that position and his abdication notice, as read on the BBC by Alvar Liddell 8-) Spooky or what?
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc7FcrOwWjQ&feature=player_embedded[/media]
Indeed as I didn't manage to yet get around to listening to that broadcast!! :-[ :-[ :-[ :D ;)
I was of course just working on historical knowledge :D :D ;)
Now listened to the broadcast, and it reminds me of the contemporary reaction to it.
My father, still at school at the time, told me his teacher was fuming about it, and all the adults he knew thought it was terrible that a Prince of the Realm would abandon his duty and responsibility to the British Nation and its peoples in not continuing to be King. To the people around him Edward was committing a dereliction of duty and should now be shown no respect >:( >:(
As history has shown us of course, thank God Edward to not continue as King and betray this country and its peoples further! >:( >:( >:(
;) ;) ;) :y
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
Yes, he is entitled to have an opinion, as are we all. However, it is not true to claim that we have complete freedom of speech. Our actions are still (rightly or wrongly) controlled by State, Tradition, Constitution, Law, Political Correctness etc., etc.
In this case HRH ran roughshod over the planning process by running to his powerful friends in powerful places. Could he have not, as per the planning process, merely have written in with his objection, as Mr Windsor, to the correct planning authorities?
As it happens, I (reluctantly) agree with Charles's opinion on this occassion, but not with the way he acted. An opinion I am also entitled to hold ::)
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
Yes, he is entitled to have an opinion, as are we all. However, it is not true to claim that we have complete freedom of speech. Our actions are still (rightly or wrongly) controlled by State, Tradition, Constitution, Law, Political Correctness etc., etc.
In this case HRH ran roughshod over the planning process by running to his powerful friends in powerful places. Could he have not, as per the planning process, merely have written in with his objection, as Mr Windsor, to the correct planning authorities?
As it happens, I (reluctantly) agree with Charles's opinion on this occassion, but not with the way he acted. An opinion I am also entitled to hold ::)
Perks of the job, we've all abused them at some time or other ;)
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
Yes, he is entitled to have an opinion, as are we all. However, it is not true to claim that we have complete freedom of speech. Our actions are still (rightly or wrongly) controlled by State, Tradition, Constitution, Law, Political Correctness etc., etc.
In this case HRH ran roughshod over the planning process by running to his powerful friends in powerful places. Could he have not, as per the planning process, merely have written in with his objection, as Mr Windsor, to the correct planning authorities?
As it happens, I (reluctantly) agree with Charles's opinion on this occassion, but not with the way he acted. An opinion I am also entitled to hold ::)
Perks of the job, we've all abused them at some time or other ;)
He never said a single word, or approached the planners, in any way (which WOULD have been a breach) ....
He spoke to the owners about his worries about the architecs ideas, the owners withdrew the application for planning.
In other words, the owners changed their minds. The planning committee may have thrown the plans out anyway.
Now, the debateable point is... how much influence did his views have on the owners decision .. something we will never know .. they MIGHT of disliked the plans anyway !!!
storm, teacup, by "luvvies" in the architect world who always think they know best .. when actually most of them are useless.
-
Yes, it looks awful --- but is far from the worst looking building around .... look at most of the monstrosities that went up in the 60's and 70's.
But ..... (personal feelings towards Charles apart) ....it was an abuse of a priviledged position.
I disagree entirely .. he had an opinion .. so he aired it. just like you and I can and do. The fact the developers listened and acted on his opinion is not his call.
Are we saying that he cannot have an opinion, or voice that opinion ???
In the subsequent totalitarian state.. who would decide who's opinions are allowed and who's are not ???
Freedom of speech applies to everyone.. not just those whos's views you agree with.
Yes, he is entitled to have an opinion, as are we all. However, it is not true to claim that we have complete freedom of speech. Our actions are still (rightly or wrongly) controlled by State, Tradition, Constitution, Law, Political Correctness etc., etc.
In this case HRH ran roughshod over the planning process by running to his powerful friends in powerful places. Could he have not, as per the planning process, merely have written in with his objection, as Mr Windsor, to the correct planning authorities?
As it happens, I (reluctantly) agree with Charles's opinion on this occassion, but not with the way he acted. An opinion I am also entitled to hold ::)
Perks of the job, we've all abused them at some time or other ;)
He never said a single word, or approached the planners, in any way (which WOULD have been a breach) ....
He spoke to the owners about his worries about the architecs ideas, the owners withdrew the application for planning.
In other words, the owners changed their minds. The planning committee may have thrown the plans out anyway.
Now, the debateable point is... how much influence did his views have on the owners decision .. something we will never know .. they MIGHT of disliked the plans anyway !!!
storm, teacup, by "luvvies" in the architect world who always think they know best .. when actually most of them are useless.
I would love to get into this but can't really.
I will chance saying that, at certain levels within the Establishment, things left unsaid often carry as much weight as those that are openly and unequivocally expressed.
The POW and his advisors are well aware of this of course and are past masters of turning it to their advantage.
-
"storm, teacup, by "luvvies" in the architect world who always think they know best .. when actually most of them are useless. "
Can't argue there :y
TBH though I do tend to allow my judgement to become clouded when it comes to Charlie boy. So will say no more.
-
All new buildings here and abroad over the last few hundred years have been controversial - the Eiffel Tower, Nelson's Column, St. Paul's...the list goes on and on, future generations will judge us by our architecture just as we judge past generations on theirs - i'm just glad they got it right, i hope we can get it right most of the time, and common sense and good taste will prevail over corporate lunacy! ;)