Dickie Arbiter's Book: on His Time w/Prince Charles, Diana & Other Royals

Started by Limabeany, August 03, 2014, 10:16:49 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

PrincessOfPeace

I personally think Charles will rue the day he put that up on his website about The Princess Consort.

cinrit

Always be yourself.  Unless you can be a unicorn.  Then always be a unicorn.

FanDianaFancy

Quote from: cinrit on August 22, 2014, 10:35:56 AM
I can't find the original announcement, but in the FAQ's at the Prince of Wales website, it says:

"As was explained at the time of their wedding in April 2005, it is intended that The Duchess will be known as HRH The Princess Consort when The Prince of Wales accedes to The Throne."

FAQs


Cindy

I  have BEEN INTENDING to lose weight  for the past  5 years.   :teehee:

I INTENDED  to be rich.

I INTENED  today  to  do everything my  Things-to-do list.

I INTENED  to  be  placed  in a better work  position  this year.

Intend. Intended.

OK.

Word, EXCELLENT wording  on their part  as they, TPTB, pr  team, the writers, legal  dept, etc.

I have said before, princess to King. No.

BRF- The King is married to the Queen.  :windsor1:   :Jen:
The Queen is married  to the Prince.
Charles is the husband  who will be King and Camilla , his wife, will be Queen.

As we discussed  on the other threads about PD's  lost  of HRH and  The...major  parts  of  being styled and titled.  It is very  big  in their world.

Camilla  will be styled and titled  Queen (common term)   and  nothing less.

amabel, yes,  I am sure  PC, I mean King C  will not  bestow  on  his stepkids any kind  of HRH  title because even though he can  do whatever he likes, that during these times would be a bit much. If  PC and CBP lived  say, 200  years, even that recently, he  could  ahve done this.  Titles and  lands   were  given out by the Monarch like candy  during history . Taken away  too. Sometimes the line just ended.
HOWEVER, I  would not be surpirsed  if  KC gave  some things to his godson and stepson, TBP like  Order of the Garter  or  Sir.  Celebs Mick and Paul and other people  have that.  TPB  is a celeb sort of in his profession. 

LPC-Lopes  will be one  when her  father-in-law dies, Lady and whatnot of that line.

Titles,styling mean everything  in their world.

Queen Camilla  is on  her way.
I do NOT , DO not like her.
I always say I am unbiased, but  she rightfully ,legally, must be Queen Camila and deserves  to be Queen Camilla......................................QUEEN OF THE  ROTWEILLERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Well, you have  just have to take a negative comment at her. LOL!!


Also, and I  do not blame, but no way  are her kids and grandkids going  to shutted away  to her , their  RMHouse house and and she can sneak ,  go off like now and see them   there.  They  will be with her.
Yes, amabel, you are correct about PPhillip. Well, he  is not king Phillip. He can just sit  his old butt down  and accept it.
His son, King Charles, overules  him. PPhillip has no power and  would have no right nor power . 

Yes, amabel, the people  and changes.  I think the PC and  CPB  controversy is not over.  It is quiet for now.
When QEII  dies,  the  last phase  will start.
Yes, the will surely some controversy and  much media reports  for and against  C being called  Q  and  more when her children are there at  Buck Balcony  and  Sandringham Christmas walk.  Like with all things BRF, it  will  blow over  and the people will  accept it  as they always  do and have done for centruries. From Henry  marrying and declaring next wife  up watever he wanted  to  chopping their heads  of  for whatever reason he  thought of  .  To  PC  marrying CPB. To  the big  media repeorts about  WnK and the cost of KP  to decorate to AH to decorate  to his doing whatever he wants and it is  now, S&R. To  PAndrew dating  Koo.  To PC and PD divorce.
To the  people , slowly  accepting, when the time times, for PAndrew to take Sarah back, in  MY opinion there. I believe when QEII  dies, they will get back together. I would PPhillip, but he  is  not King.  They waited for QEII to die. Ahhhh. Thta showed  respect.   PC married  CPB,  so why was PAndrew denied.  Awww.... Sarah was never the mistress..awwwww.  See where I am going with this.

The only thing the people   could  not accept and  TPTB, BRF,  politicans, etc. simply could not make right  due to the times and just  everything about  her , was the WSimpson.  I have said, I think if she were a pretty, young, fertile , never married  American heiress, ok.  A titled unmarreid girl from Italy, France, any Europoean nation, ok.  A  rich  unmarried, Canadian or from So.Africa  all British  descent, ok.   Anything but what she was: several times married and  divorced,  reputation as party girl soicalite with  unscruplelous jet set,  ugly, manly looking and so it says infertile, threatenting in that  PE  said  , him or her or not  and gave it all up for the likes of her.

sandy

Charles will certainly provide trust funds to Camilla's grandchildren. He was said to have given trust funds to Tom and Laura and employment to Camilla's sister Anabel. I would not be surprised if he conferred titles on Tom and Laura.

amabel

Quote from: cinrit on August 22, 2014, 10:35:56 AM
I can't find the original announcement, but in the FAQ's at the Prince of Wales website, it says:

"As was explained at the time of their wedding in April 2005, it is intended that The Duchess will be known as HRH The Princess Consort when The Prince of Wales accedes to The Throne."

FAQs


Cindy

well that just says "It is intneded" but I think when the queen goes, it will be decided formally that she'll be crowned queen.  At the time of their wedding, ti was announced that she'd probably be Princess Consort but they were being cautious. I don't believe that people will care very much in another say 10 years...

amabel

Quote from: Canuck on August 20, 2014, 12:05:15 PM
IMO, Charles had nothing to do with Pamela Hicks' book and was likely appalled she was dragging up the same old stories all over again.  I think Charles is smart enough to realize at this point it does no good at all for him to try to explain his perspective on his first marriage, and that the best thing for him is to hope the topic comes up in the media/with the public as little as possible. 
well I agree with that.  I think he is indifferent though at this stage.  he knows that He's come back from a very low place in popularity to a modest approval rating, and that he is on track for being King I due course.  I would say he knows it would not look good to trash Diana, but he knows that there will be people out there, who will do so for various reasons.. certainly from about 3 years after her death most bios of her that appeared were a LOT less sympathetic than might be expected ( such as Jepshson, Wharfe etc), and I should say that he feels that there's nothing he can do about them, it si best to stay silent. I think that the Pam Hicks book is what the RF mostly feel about Diana and while he'd prefer it if they all stayed stchum, he just says nothing, and does not want to give them impression of more family rows going on.
I thinkt that if he CAN do soemting like with Arbiter, he will make a small effort but it does not look too good if he and the RF are seen as trying to interfere too much with what people publish...

sandy

Charles was always on track to be King.

Well let's see the recent biographies about Diana were written by Charles sympathizers: Penny Junor and Ingrid Seward so any guesses about how Diana is going to be portrayed. Tina Brown's was just gossipy.

Diana: The Story of a princess and Sarah Bradford's books were sympathetic and then there was the book which paid tribute to Diana's charities.

Wharfe and Jephson were not exactly kind to Prince Charles.

Charles could have made Diana non negotiable and his minions would have never dared to bash Diana posthumously. Funny how Charles is able to make a fuss only when it suits his purposes. But with Diana he is totally helpless to discourage the bashing. More free passes for Prince Charles.

Trudie

Quote from: amabel on August 31, 2014, 12:15:33 PM
Quote from: Canuck on August 20, 2014, 12:05:15 PM
IMO, Charles had nothing to do with Pamela Hicks' book and was likely appalled she was dragging up the same old stories all over again.  I think Charles is smart enough to realize at this point it does no good at all for him to try to explain his perspective on his first marriage, and that the best thing for him is to hope the topic comes up in the media/with the public as little as possible. 
well I agree with that.  I think he is indifferent though at this stage.  he knows that He's come back from a very low place in popularity to a modest approval rating, and that he is on track for being King I due course.  I would say he knows it would not look good to trash Diana, but he knows that there will be people out there, who will do so for various reasons.. certainly from about 3 years after her death most bios of her that appeared were a LOT less sympathetic than might be expected ( such as Jepshson, Wharfe etc), and I should say that he feels that there's nothing he can do about them, it si best to stay silent. I think that the Pam Hicks book is what the RF mostly feel about Diana and while he'd prefer it if they all stayed stchum, he just says nothing, and does not want to give them impression of more family rows going on.
I thinkt that if he CAN do soemting like with Arbiter, he will make a small effort but it does not look too good if he and the RF are seen as trying to interfere too much with what people publish...

See Amabel you just hit the nail on the head. He stayed silent on the books written by Jephson and Wharfe knowing they might be critical especially since they departed her employ though they were a bit critical about him. He could have done something about the Hicks book after all she is his relative but chose not to because she is totally sympathetic to him and trashes Diana but this book by Arbiter He feels he can do something because he is totally afraid that the real truth about his marriage to Diana and the fact that Camilla crowded the marriage and his demeaning treatment of Diana is something he will want to have forever hidden. When it comes to self preservation that is when Charles makes an effort when it comes to the memory of his ex wife well trashing her makes Camilla look a lot better in his eyes.



cinrit

"It is understood" that "officials" are trying to stop the book from being published sounds cagey to me.  Are we even sure that Charles is angry?  "The prince is said to be furious...it is reported" sounds cagey, too.  Who reported it?  No source named.

Cindy
Always be yourself.  Unless you can be a unicorn.  Then always be a unicorn.

amabel

I'm sure he's not pleased.  Whether it is a good idea to try and take legal action is another matter.

cinrit

Well, he can't be very pleased, that's for sure.  But the original report was that "Charles is furious".  Is he?  There's a vast difference between being furious and not being pleased.

Cindy
Always be yourself.  Unless you can be a unicorn.  Then always be a unicorn.

Limabeany

Charles is known to be tantrum like... Even throwing things at his employees. So furious would sound like him...
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

cinrit

Charles was known to be tantrum prone in his younger years.  I haven't heard anything like that about him the past couple of decades, though.  Benefit of the doubt.....

Cindy
Always be yourself.  Unless you can be a unicorn.  Then always be a unicorn.

Limabeany

There is no evidence he has changed, is he practicing yoga now?  :happy15:
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

cinrit

I actually wouldn't be surprised if I found out he meditates (and maybe yoga, too).  The Dalai Lama counts him as a friend, so maybe he's taught him control.

Cindy
Always be yourself.  Unless you can be a unicorn.  Then always be a unicorn.

Limabeany

The Dalai Lama counts anyone who can give him a higher profile and can raise money for him as a friend...  :happy15:
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

cinrit

Always be yourself.  Unless you can be a unicorn.  Then always be a unicorn.

Limabeany

I have no doubt Charles is knowledgeable about such issues and interested in deep issues, but also no doubt he is tantrum prone, although. I doubt in front of the DL. The DL is also someone who very much needs money and friends in high places...
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

Trudie




Blue Clover

I would this book but I feel like I probably know everything it says.

Limabeany

His position was unique and different from anyone else who has written books about them and about this time. It could be interesting.  :sigh:
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

cate1949

well he just played a relatively prominent role in the recent Harry documentary and you know everyone in that docu was vetted by the RF before they were chosen to appear so I'd say there is little danger of Dicky saying anything controversial in his book.  He also put a huge gloss on Harry's youthful indiscretions - the usual boys will be boys sort of thing.  So I don't buy that PC is all that upset or that the book will bare all.  Few tidbits here and there maybe but nothing of substance.

Windsor

It really will shed light into the whole issue, but I am certain it won't be damaging to anyone. I can't see him trashing the people he worked for so long and so closely with.

Limabeany

I see him as a royalist, so I agree, but they could not have felt comfortable at the thought of,another book written about this time by an insider, however respectful Dickie may be in his account.
"You don't have to be pretty. You don't owe prettiness to anyone. Not to your boyfriend/spouse/partner, not to your co-workers, especially not to random men on the street. You don't owe it to your mother, you don't owe it to your children, you don't owe it to civilization in general. Prettiness is not a rent you pay for occupying a space marked 'female'." Diana Vreeland.

Windsor

Trust me, these people are past all that! It was all about 20+ years ago, the Royal Family have moved on and are confident that nothing will ever come from any "new" revelation, regardless of who may publish it. Are they worried? NO! Are they disappointed? Probably yes, you wouldn't want a former employee of yours to go about telling people about you and your private life... Regardless of whether its good or bad...  :shrug: