REELZ tv show on Princess Diana's Mercedes

Started by FanDianaFancy, December 16, 2017, 12:54:07 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sandy

No she did not "volunteer" to do any such thing. She leaked divorce terms to the press but she never said "I don't want the HRH." If she had she would not have been concerned about it and moved on. William even said he'd restore it when he became King.

Charles has people who do report things for him. Diana changed the locks at KP lest Fawcett do some snooping.

The HRH should have been a given in the divorce settlement. No Diana did not "decline it."

Charles still cooperates with Junor and his friends still provide gossip for Junor. He can't let it go.


Kritter

QuoteSaying she feared "Charles people" is an insult to members of the armed forces/security people who have served the BRF for years.

No it wasn't, you said it yourself "people who have served the BRF for years". I wonder where their loyalties would lie.    :hmm:

royalanthropologist

Well she did decline their services....her fault, not theirs.

@sandy. HRH is never a given. It is in the gift of the monarch. If you have a manipulative daughter in law pretending not to want it in order to force you to give it to her, you take it away. Logical way of thinking. Diana said she was mistreated by the royal family, even calling them "this f....n family". Perhaps the best way to let he be truly "free" of them was to allow her to live the life of a private citizen without the burdens of the "terrible" monarchy??

Diana was very paranoid but there is absolutely no reason for Charles to want to be involved in her life after 1996. He was reportedly delighted at the divorce and happy to be a "free man". Why would he want to keep following someone he wanted to get away from? Doesn't make sense.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Kritter

QuoteDiana was very paranoid but there is absolutely no reason for Charles to want to be involved in her life after 1996.

Sure he would want to keep an eye on her because as long as she was living she had the ability to destroy both him & Camilla.     :brightside:

sandy

Quote from: royalanthropologist on December 20, 2017, 04:55:50 PM
Well she did decline their services....her fault, not theirs.

@sandy. HRH is never a given. It is in the gift of the monarch. If you have a manipulative daughter in law pretending not to want it in order to force you to give it to her, you take it away. Logical way of thinking. Diana said she was mistreated by the royal family, even calling them "this f....n family". Perhaps the best way to let he be truly "free" of them was to allow her to live the life of a private citizen without the burdens of the "terrible" monarchy??

Diana was very paranoid but there is absolutely no reason for Charles to want to be involved in her life after 1996. He was reportedly delighted at the divorce and happy to be a "free man". Why would he want to keep following someone he wanted to get away from? Doesn't make sense.

Well she has a manipulative daughter in law now. How do you think Camilla got in by being pleasant?

Diana never made that comment publicly it was on a tape. You do excuse the talk by Charles on the Camillagate tape because it was private, it was not exactly "proper" language.

Diana was not paranoid enough at first. She realized later how her "friends" (translation: Charles friends) were encouraging Charles and Camilla to sneak around on their spouses.

Diana should have gotten the HRH. That is a no brainer. IMO

royalanthropologist

Quote from: Kritter on December 20, 2017, 05:14:09 PM
Sure he would want to keep an eye on her because as long as she was living she had the ability to destroy both him & Camilla.     :brightside:

How typical of Diana. Someone divorces you and you are still thinking about your capability of "destroying" them. How would she "destroy" them exactly? She had already washed all her dirty laundry and they had survived it. It was her who was destroying herself with her press intrigues. Instead of living her life, she was thinking of how to revenge on people who did not give a hoot about her. How sad is that?

As for the HRH; it was is not a "no brainer" because a decision has to be made based on the circumstances and the feelings of the queen. That was the queen's decision to make, not one for Diana's fans. It was her title and her household. Diana "leaked" details in which she specifically said she was no longer going to be an HRH. She then got her friends to lie to the press that the queen had taken it away. The queen's staff was so irritated that they released an unequivocal statement clearly saying that the decision to give up the title was "hers and hers alone". Ditto for the security. For whatever reasons, she claimed she did not want them and then her fans turn round complaining about the BRF for doing exactly what she asked them to do???
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

#31
I would say C and C shot themselves in the foot.

Charles aired and washed his dirty laundry first in 1994 and even this year with his gal pal Penny Junor.

I see it as a no brainer even if you do not. I think Camilla fans approve of taking it away.

Diana never said she wanted the HRH taken away.

The decision was out of Diana's hands. She was not calling the shots about the title and it was not her decision. One report said Charles persuaded the QUeen to take it away.

Diana did not make the decision to lose her title. Ever. And the Queen never said Diana did.

Prince William Wanted to Return Diana's Title - The Duke of Cambridge Made a Vow to His Mom

So if as you say Diana wanted the title removed, why would she be upset when it was removed. A big contradiction.

I believe Charles was behind it.

This is what was said by the Palace spokesman at the time:

A palace spokesman said: ``This agreement recognises, on the one hand, that the princess took the style HRH on marriage and therefore would be expected to give it up on divorce. And, on the other hand, it recognises she remains in a unique position as the mother of Prince William"

It says nothing about it being Diana's decision to have it removed.

royalanthropologist

Charles does not give or take away titles until he is King.  It is the queen. However, I suspect that Charles, QM, DOE and Charles all agreed that Diana must never again be allowed to trivialize the HRH title like she did with that leak. She was punished for the leak and I am surprised she expected any other another response after all she had done in Panorama and Morton.

You ask why Diana would be upset about the title. It is because she was trying to manipulate and finally got comeuppance for it. That was not the first time Diana said one thing and the later said the exact opposite. Just look at her panorama interview. Says she does not want a divorce and then does everything to bring about a divorce. It was typical of her and people who have not matured emotionally. They send out mixed messages all the time. You end up in a double bind with them. If you don't do what they asked for then they complain and they do the same if you do as they asked. 

In any case, Diana said she had had such a hard time in the BRF. Wouldn't it be logical for her to completely disassociate herself from them? I mean really stop it all, no HRH or royal references and lead a quiet life away from her abusers? Of course she couldn't do that because it would mean no longer having press attention? It is her that chose to remain public and controversial. Had she gone about her holiday like normal people instead of calling in the press, we would be having a different conversation altogether.

As for C&C "shooting themselves in the foot", both were safely with their families in the privacy of their holiday homes at the exact moment Diana was being chased by the paparazzi in Paris.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Kritter

The public will call Charles "The tampon King" when he reigns since that is how most of them remember him.    :windsor1:

royalanthropologist

I would argue that not all members of "the public". The ones who remember that criminally obtained and immorally distributed tape are of a certain age. By the time Charles becomes King, many of them will have other pressing matters to deal with than the spoils of a criminally obtained recording done some 30 years ago. People really do move on sometimes. They really do.

And of course Charles as a leader must accept that the world sometimes has crass people that refer to others as "tampons" for nothing more than the sake of malice. It is part of being in public life, knowing that you get gems and lowlifes in equal measure. Charles will survive it like he has survived all the other mud thrown at him.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Kritter

That tape is now part of History whether Charles & his fans like it or not.

royalanthropologist

#36
Just like squiggygate and the crank calls. But I am sure that natural reticence and basic consideration will deter many members of the public from calling Diana names as a consequence of the behavior she exhibited on those tape. Of course someone like Trump might just say it as it is but those are unusual people.

Besides both C&D have done a lot more than engage in embarrassing sex talk or make crank calls. I am sure there are many people who understand that and celebrate the good things they have done.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Kritter

QuoteJust like squiggygate

Yes part of history.

Quotepublic from calling Diana names

Some in the public still call her names, you included & always will. Some won't because they understand what she was up against considering they have also been in abusive or had traumatic experiences.

QuoteOf course someone like Trump might just say it as it is but those are unusual people.

He says the things he does because he thinks he is living in a reality show.

sandy

#38
Quote from: royalanthropologist on December 20, 2017, 08:21:26 PM
I would argue that not all members of "the public". The ones who remember that criminally obtained and immorally distributed tape are of a certain age. By the time Charles becomes King, many of them will have other pressing matters to deal with than the spoils of a criminally obtained recording done some 30 years ago. People really do move on sometimes. They really do.

And of course Charles as a leader must accept that the world sometimes has crass people that refer to others as "tampons" for nothing more than the sake of malice. It is part of being in public life, knowing that you get gems and lowlifes in equal measure. Charles will survive it like he has survived all the other mud thrown at him.
[/quote

Charles biographers will refer to this during and after his lifetime.


Double post auto-merged: December 20, 2017, 11:16:19 PM


Quote from: royalanthropologist on December 20, 2017, 08:40:39 PM
Just like squiggygate and the crank calls. But I am sure that natural reticence and basic consideration will deter many members of the public from calling Diana names as a consequence of the behavior she exhibited on those tape. Of course someone like Trump might just say it as it is but those are unusual people.

Besides both C&D have done a lot more than engage in embarrassing sex talk or make crank calls. I am sure there are many people who understand that and celebrate the good things they have done.

The "crank" calls were never recorded. And I wonder if Hoare worries that his calls to Diana were recorded. He put some calls in himself to Diana.

Charles and Camilla showed great selfishness in wishing an ambulance strike would never end (the strike cost human lives) so her pesky husband who was deployed in London during the strike, would not return and spoil their fun. Shows their mindset. This was recorded on the Camillagate tape.

royalanthropologist

@Kritter. I must address something you wrote because it was personal to me (you always ...get personal when the argument is getting away from you) You wrote:

"Some in the public still call her names, you included & always will."

That is an outright lie. I don't think I have ever called Diana names. I may describe her character in harsh terms but never "names" or gratuitous insults.  In any case there is nothing I have said about Diana that comes close to the rather crass (IMO) terms you have used to describe Charles. Nothing at all.



"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Kritter

When you speak of Diana in the terms you use that is calling her names. Generally I make fun of Charles & Camilla. Many of Charles's fans go on about Diana's mental problems in terms that indicate Diana was a mental case including you.

I never said I was an innocent or pretended to be but made an observation about what I read every day. Maybe I should have put it in parenthesis because I do not know that you personally will continue with your character Assasination of Diana

QuoteDiana that comes close to the rather crass (IMO) terms you have used to describe Charles.

Arguments do not get away from me because I generally just leave or ignore the conversation when it gets ridiculous & a repeat of statements already made. I will point out that you have done what you say your objection to my post was, I guess that makes us equal then doesn't it. I don't use crass terms to describe Charles. I do say things that you as a fan would not use but I guess that is a problem when people have differing opinions. One is not right or wrong when it comes to opinions only when it relates to facts (not propaganda but facts).

sandy

Quote from: royalanthropologist on December 20, 2017, 07:58:35 PM
Charles does not give or take away titles until he is King.  It is the queen. However, I suspect that Charles, QM, DOE and Charles all agreed that Diana must never again be allowed to trivialize the HRH title like she did with that leak. She was punished for the leak and I am surprised she expected any other another response after all she had done in Panorama and Morton.

You ask why Diana would be upset about the title. It is because she was trying to manipulate and finally got comeuppance for it. That was not the first time Diana said one thing and the later said the exact opposite. Just look at her panorama interview. Says she does not want a divorce and then does everything to bring about a divorce. It was typical of her and people who have not matured emotionally. They send out mixed messages all the time. You end up in a double bind with them. If you don't do what they asked for then they complain and they do the same if you do as they asked. 

In any case, Diana said she had had such a hard time in the BRF. Wouldn't it be logical for her to completely disassociate herself from them? I mean really stop it all, no HRH or royal references and lead a quiet life away from her abusers? Of course she couldn't do that because it would mean no longer having press attention? It is her that chose to remain public and controversial. Had she gone about her holiday like normal people instead of calling in the press, we would be having a different conversation altogether.

As for C&C "shooting themselves in the foot", both were safely with their families in the privacy of their holiday homes at the exact moment Diana was being chased by the paparazzi in Paris.

Charles can talk.  He would not order he would "persuade."

Charles did plenty of "trivializing" of  his HRH. IMO.

Diana was not "punished" for the leak. The quote I had clearly said that upon divorce she was not entitled to keep the HRH and this from a Palace spokesperson. The Queen's spokesperson said hey we were going to give her the HRH but we are punishing her now and withholding it. That would sound really petty and small on the Queen's part. IMO.

ANd Charles trivialized his HRH by bashing his parents in 1994 a whole year before the Panorama interview.

Why on earth would Diana tell millions of viewers she wanted a divorce? Charles did not tell Dimbleby this in his interview or the book. Dimbleby was Charles' Morton.

Charles is typical of a man who never grew up, obsessed with how "mean" he was treated when he was a little boy.

royalanthropologist

Whatever his faults are, Charles is not the one that got rid of his security and entered a write off car with a drunken driver to engage in a high speed chase with the paparazzi. That was Diana's poor decision-making and it cost her her life.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Kritter

^ A very simplified form of dismissal as if Diana knew all the things you listed & proceeded to go ahead anyway.

There are some that believe the royals set her up for Death so C&C could stop worrying. Is that the real reason Charles immediately flew to Paris instead of being a real Father & helping his Sons deal with their grief?

sandy

Quote from: royalanthropologist on December 21, 2017, 12:48:05 AM
Whatever his faults are, Charles is not the one that got rid of his security and entered a write off car with a drunken driver to engage in a high speed chase with the paparazzi. That was Diana's poor decision-making and it cost her her life.

Diana did not say well I think I'll get in the car with a drunken driver and be involved in a high speed chase.

Why was it HER poor decision making. Before MAF was being blamed for the accident. So which is it?

The sole survivor does not remember a thing. I would like to know why as a security guard he let a "drunk" driver get behind the wheel and did not check to see if the seatbelts functioned. Of course he's off the hook because he can't remember a thing.

And of course Diana's "medical care" was so pathetic. Letting her sit bleeding for a while before even attempting to get her out of the car and taking a loonnnggg time getting her to a hospital passing two other hospitals on the way.

royalanthropologist

Her very first mistake was Morton and Panorama which made it untenable for her to remain Charles' wife, in theory and public at least. Then she compounded those mistakes by declining professional security due to her silly conspiracy theories. Then she called the press to her holiday...etc. Bad decision-making every step of the way and nothing to do with any member of the BRF. Of course her tunnel-vision fans always cheered her on thinking they were sticking it to the BRF and Charles. Instead they were helping her write her own tragic end.

Had she kept her mouth shut about her private life or alternatively arranged for proper security after her divorce, she would be ok. Ditto if she had not opted to try and rope herself into Camilla's 50th birthday party or manipulate Khan by using Dodi and the press.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Kritter

QuoteOf course her tunnel-vision fans always cheered her on thinking they were sticking it to the BRF and Charles. Instead they were helping her write her own tragic end.

And now it is Diana's fans fault.    xD   I think Snoopy & Woodstock were in on it to.    :hall3:

sandy

Quote from: royalanthropologist on December 21, 2017, 01:14:07 AM
Her very first mistake was Morton and Panorama which made it untenable for her to remain Charles' wife, in theory and public at least. Then she compounded those mistakes by declining professional security due to her silly conspiracy theories. Then she called the press to her holiday...etc. Bad decision-making every step of the way and nothing to do with any member of the BRF. Of course her tunnel-vision fans always cheered her on thinking they were sticking it to the BRF and Charles. Instead they were helping her write her own tragic end.

Had she kept her mouth shut about her private life or alternatively arranged for proper security after her divorce, she would be ok. Ditto if she had not opted to try and rope herself into Camilla's 50th birthday party or manipulate Khan by using Dodi and the press.

You keep on ignoring that Dimbleby book and interview. What a gem: Charles admitted he married Diana preferring the mistress; he said he would "keep on" seeing married Camilla, he trashed his parents, he blamed everybody else for his own shortcomings. And in the interview he outed his mistress forcing the divorce of the PBs.

If Charles kept his  mouth shut and stopped whinging to his friends during his marriage to Diana and clung to the mistress, maybe he would have been a real man and had a marriage that worked. Charles started writing whining letters to his friends saying such things as "all she did was say yes to me" and they started bashing the wife and bringing mistress Camilla to safe houses to "comfort" Poor Poor Charles.

A real man would have stopped seeing the other woman who clearly had her own agenda.

Diana was sitting on a diving board, got her picture taken which wiped Grinning Camilla off the covers of newspapers. Dodi and Hasnet Khan were not near her.

Diana did not cause her own death. That is just a cruel thing to say about a human being. You keep saying it was an accident now you blame Diana for it all.


Kritter

QuoteThat is just a cruel thing to say about a human being.

I have heard that sperm count is supposed to be considered worse.    :lift:

sandy

What is ignored is that Diana had to contend with nasty stories leaked by Charles' buddies to "help" Charles when he whinged about Diana. The real "gem" was how Diana tossed out Harvey the dog because Charles liked him. In reality, Harvey the dog was incontinent and had to be confined to the kennels at Highgrove (which probably are better than studio apartments people live in) and Charles was never deprived of the dog. This was all pre Morton. ANd Camilla would call up the Sun Editor to give her side of the story. Funny how she knew all about what Charles did in her reports.