Withering verdict of LORD BELL, Lady Thatcher’s favourite ad man

Started by Limabeany, October 01, 2014, 08:57:06 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Canuck

Somehow I really don't think Charles and Camilla sit around at home looking up every random bit of criticism of Diana so they can delight in it.  Not everyone's lives revolve around Diana.

sandy

This is all speculation. Nobody knows for sure. It certainly does not hurt them with writers tossing stones at Diana in print.  The DM giving excerpts from these books is not low profile. C and C would have to notice it. And the Daily Mail certainly uses superlatives for Camilla.  Interesting that they publish Diana slamming articles  and write flattering articles about Camilla. Maybe some Charles people own shares in the DM. Wouldn't surprise me.

Canuck

Or maybe the people running the Daily Mail are among the majority of the population that report in polls having a favorable view of Camilla?  You are entitled to your negative opinion of her, obviously, but that doesn't mean that all or even most other people share it. 

I despise the Canadian Prime Minister, but that doesn't mean most Canadians agree with me.  When newspapers write positive things about him I don't assume it's a conspiracy or that a personal friend of his owns the paper.  It just means someone who disagrees with me is expressing their opinion.

sandy

What polls? None are definitive unless every single person is questioned. It is all speculation. It is fair to say that some adore her, some loathe her, some don't care. Proportions of reactions subject to speculation.

You cannot state as a fact about "most" people not sharing negative opinions. It is all speculation. I do notice negative comments about her in articles. Not everybody thinks her charming.

Canuck

Quote from: sandy on October 02, 2014, 01:31:36 AM
What polls? None are definitive unless every single person is questioned. It is all speculation.

That isn't how polls work.  There is never, ever an opinion poll that asks every single person their opinion.  Nor is it necessary to do so.  Using statistical methods and random samples of the population, a poll can tell you within a margin of error (usually a few percentage points) what the results for the entire population would be.

That's not controversial.  This has been studied and tested and works on proven methods.  If you refuse to accept opinion polls of any kind, that's a very strange and anti-science and -math position to take.

But you obviously don't think all polls are useless, because I've seen you on many occasions refer to polls that say Diana was popular, Charles was disliked, etc.  Which leads me to conclude that you only reject polls when public opinion doesn't agree with your opinions.

TLLK

 :goodpost: I don't always agree with the outcome of an opinion poll, but I wouldn't discount their use all together.

FanDianaFancy

Quote from: sandy on October 01, 2014, 01:44:02 PM
Well maybe those who put out scathing things about the dead princess should be instructed to "move on."

Really.

Really what  is the point ?  While anyone can have  an opinion, FACTS cannot be disputed.

Was  she an airhead?
He said so and so she was an airhead TO HIM . Fine. That  can  be  debatable or not.

It  is  like  Beauty  is in the Eye  of the Beholder.
Some people think she was a Plain Jane. Rail thin. No shape.

Some people think  she  was  very pretty.

Some people think Camilla , DofRotweillers ,  is a very  beautiful woman.

Camilla thought PD  was  a ridicuolus creature.  That was her opinion of  PD

PD  thought  Camilla was a Roteweiller, which I find insulting because  Rotties  are  cute, brave, smart, strong.
That is my opinion of Rottweillers.  My   friends' Rottie is  like this.  Your  friend's Rottie  is not  like this.
That might not be your  OPINION of  Rotweillers.

FACTS  vs. OPINIONS.

This  statement  by him  is  SIMPLY  NOT  TRUE. It  is NOT A FACT.
"The problem was that she fancied the privileges of being the Princess of Wales, but not the sacrifices and responsibilities."

It  is his opinion, but  it  is not  true  even though it  is HIS OPINION  because there ARE FACTS To JUSTIFY  it  as NOT TRUE. YES, He can have his opinion. We all can, HOWEVER there are FACTS  for somethings  to  PROVE  the opposite.

I think QEII  is   not that old.
To me, she is not that old. Define old.
How can you nsay  I am wrong?
Well,  someone living pass 80 is not young.  It is closer to 100. Average  life span  of  person?
I  have my opoinion, but  there are FACTS to not support  my opinion.

W  think's if  you have any kind of cancer, no matter what  kind  or  how big  or or how small,  age of person , etc. just  diet and exercise, fruits, drinkm lots of fruit juices,  homeopathic  things are best.  That IS HIS  OPINION.  HE can have HIS OPINION.
However, you have  PROOF that  these things do not  cure cancer or  help someone live ...

K THINKS  childhood immunizations  are  not good for children and they  cause Autism.
That is  K's OPINION. 
HOWEVER, you have PROOF, FACTS to the contrary.

H THINKS women who choose to work outside of the home  while  raising a family  will have  unloved kids, juvenile deliquients, ill fed kids, etc. That IS  HIS OPINION.  HOWEVER, you have FACTS to proove the difference.


It  is FACT  that  PD :
married PC was born of the nobility
had  PW  early  on  in her marriage
worked while pregnant  in her  BRF duties
always  performed her BRF duties with a  smile, grace
was personable  with  her subjects and the public worldwide, took on  projects
was welcomed  by other R and  Govt. officials
was a good mother to HER sons
did not falter uner the public pressure in her professional role
took lessons  for speech
took lessons a speech in  Welsh
took lessons eye contact in speaking
a   full yrly. diary/schedule   of  working dates, places, meetings, tours, etc.
no pics of her  top (breast)  and bottom (behind).

Really?!?!??!?!?!  Come on. I GET IT!! It is understandable  to  slam a dead woman  to sing the praies of the  living  -PC and CPB  or   to slam a  dead woman  to passive agressive  sing the praises  of  PC and CPB and to  make  sure  to get in good  with them and be at court.
The  rank and file, nobility, those on the edge  wanting to  be at court  in Merry Ole  England  has  not  changed since the times  of  QEI, King Henry 8th, and beyond.  600 or years  ago  and 2014, same thing!!!  Same years.  I get it!

I understand.

I agree with sandy. Shouldn't some people  move  on  slamming  adead woman. DEAD!!!!  Talk about  a  bully to  pick on a DEAD WOMAN.

I get it though! Like I said, it  is purely personal.   
To get closer to the Crown  is to get closer to God  for these people. 
The traditions and customs of  GB and the BRF and the nobility, gentry, others on the fringe down to the subjects  love affair  to the  BRF-Monarcy and to who in the BRF  is in power.


Canuck

Quote from: FanDianaFancy on October 02, 2014, 03:57:26 AM
It  is FACT  that  PD :
married PC was born of the nobility
had  PW  early  on  in her marriage
worked while pregnant  in her  BRF duties
always  performed her BRF duties with a  smile, grace
was personable  with  her subjects and the public worldwide, took on  projects
was welcomed  by other R and  Govt. officials
was a good mother to HER sons
did not falter uner the public pressure in her professional role
took lessons  for speech
took lessons a speech in  Welsh
took lessons eye contact in speaking
a   full yrly. diary/schedule   of  working dates, places, meetings, tours, etc.
no pics of her  top (breast)  and bottom (behind).

I don't agree that all of these things are facts.  Diana "did not falter under the public pressure" is certainly what I would call an opinion; it's a subjective judgment, not an objective fact (and one that a lot of people would disagree with).  Whether Diana was a good mother -- similarly, that's an opinion.  Some people will think she was, some people will think she was not. 

cate1949

what a wicked man - well - wicked sense of observation -

interesting story about Al Fayed - the conspiracy types will make some hay out of that

as for his remarks about Diana - she is a historic figure and like all historic figures she is fair game for compliments and criticisms - her status to some as secular saint does not get her an exemption - public figures living and dead - especially dead - will be given the measure of history.  Consider the stuff said about Louis Mountbatten.  Oh yes - James Whitaker in his book claimed he had told Diana to cultivate the head down eyes up look she did so often after seeing some pics of her in that pose early after the marriage - he said he told her it was utterly disarming. 

FanDianaFancy

Canuck, I am  so sorry. You are right. I am sorry  to say such about your mother.

I did not know  she was your mother. Your brothers seem to  love  their mother and have seemed  to  have been pleased  with her as ya'll mother.


Seems to me,  the  people who can determine if  she  was a good mother would be  her three children You and your  two brothers. You  do not think she was. Your brothers think she was.
Did she abuse you?  Was abd  to to youy in any way?

Please , do tell.

LOL.

Ok, like I said. It is not debatable, but PD worked. She worked well in her role. She   had a  good public life  in her role while. She at least did THAT  right and got THAT  right. As for subjective fact, well,then    whether QEII, PAnne, PC  works  a lot,  has a full diarys  of chartiies  is  really  just a matter of opinion.  LOL!!!
  Come on!  The FACTS  as in schedules/dairys, being a patron of  oragainzations for  PD during her years, PC  QEII, PAnne,  are that they all  work   in their BRF  duties, public lives.

  Honestly, my opinion here, and  I said it before  but I do not think she had a very  happy  childhood, marriage,or  private life aside from her sons.

cate, I GET it and so true  about historic figures...  I am not  and do not want to debate with  us for the  1000th time CPB -PC and PD. PC=PD  said it all. They said FACTS about their lives then, esp. PD.
Really, what  is there left for these authors  to say? She said  all of the "good, juicy  stuff."
She did not know she was going to die, but  it is good  that she said it  all!!!


cate,  historic figures  ...well, not quite. In reference to these  PD  stories, ever notice that there ARE NO STORIES about slamming CPB or PC?   They are alive and living. Livng  Monarchs.
None of these  authors and writers of fiction and  opinion ,  people  with a  weird  obssession with slaming a dead woman will not dare write anything  about  CPB or PC.

Do you wonder why that is?

Let me give  you some answers.
Lawsuits  brought forth by the lving.
Respect  for the Power  which is CPB and  PC,  future Q and K of E.
Angling some dinner invites, tickets  for something,  interviews, some kind of in, favor  with  PC and CPB.

it  ois very interesting.

Now, cate, if   Saint Queen CPB were to die tomorrow, yeah, I think the books would come out the air, LOL!!!  Same for  Saint King PC.

Canuck

FanDianaFancy, you'll notice that I didn't say Diana was or was not a good mother.  I'm not pretending I have some insider knowledge and my opinion is more valid than anyone else's.  I'm just saying that whether Diana was a good mother IS an opinion -- yours, mine, and everyone else's.

I honestly don't understand how that's controversial.  I'm NOT SAYING she was or wasn't a good mother.  I'm saying that is the kind of statement that isn't objectively provable.  Facts are things like X person attended Y event on this date.  Opinions are things like X person did a great job at Y event or X person was charming and personable at Y event.

FanDianaFancy

Ok.  I understand .  No , you Canuck did  not  say if PD was  or was not a good mother to HER sons.

This author  did say or imply this .
Soooooo......in other words.....
PW and PH do not know what they hell they  are  talking in interviews over the years. They should have no opinion about PD.   What They have said about her is only an OPINION.
PD  was an awful, evil, crazy, psycho ,  bi-polar, lazy,  neglectful  mother to them  just like Arbitar and this author says so.
These authors  ought to know. 
IT IS A FACT  that  PD was  like this  because Arbitar and Bell said so  or implied and they ought to know. LOL!!!!


Like I keep saying, I  am  not  going to deabte with  US   here  on PC-PD-and CPB again for the  1000th time.  I am done with that.

I choose to debate  about these  authors.  Their writings.  What gives with their  slamming  of a  long, dead woman? Why?
Why  are their  no slams  of  PC and CPB in their books? Oh add  PennyJunior  's books about PH in which she  goes after PD.  The  book was suppose  to be  all about him, but his mother is slammed.  CPB, no. PC, no.

They do not write unflattering things,  true things  but not nice, about the living  who are powerful. These authors want some favor. NO, PC and CPB  have no control over these nuts.   PC adn CPB are  busy living the life of the  P and P, K and Q to be.


Canuck

I'm confused -- unless we're reading different articles, Lord Bell doesn't say anything about whether Diana was a good mother.  And on the whole, the excerpts from Arbiter's book are at least as critical of Charles as they are of Diana (who he called a devoted mother, by the way, and repeatedly praised for how good she was with Will and Harry).

Yes, there have been some books critical of Diana in recent years.  But before that there were a LOT of books critical of Charles.  One side of the story gets told, and once that's been milked dry others in the press turn around and tell the other side of the story.

It doesn't mean the authors are just trying to get honours.  It's not unique to Diana.  It's just how the world works.  People have different opinions and when one side has its say, the other side wants to tell how it sees things differently.

Eri

I love it !!! The man certainly kept it real ... this I suspect was the REAL Di her adoring public didn't get to see ...

FanDianaFancy

Eri, I know you love him!! LOL!!! Yep, he kept it real.  I  have not ever  heard  of  PD being a an airhead  or  slammed for her short  skirts.  Her adoring public  thougb never saw her  boobs  nor behind. If  the airhead  , Disneyland  princess as he says   was this way  behind closed doors, well, GOOD!!!
She manged to put  on some  clothes and cover her privates in public and  was able to make decent speeches, be articulate, eye contact, knowledgable of her subject, etc.  for the  cameras.   LOL!!!!     

OH, you don't say,  she wore short skirts. What a crime and a shame. She was an airhead too.   You guys, I think the  law should  have been  repassed and called the PD Law and  she should  have been sent to the Tower of London to  await  her trial  and  inevitable  beheading. Yeah.  LOL!!!

I am not knocking  you , Eri, but  this  new book.
Canuck, I  cannot  keep  track of the new books and  threads  and yes,   the mothering  aspect of her  was in the other thread , other book.
No, I did  not rea deither book and will not. Not that interested.
I did not Arbitar praised ehr for her life as a  mother.
I read she  told PH to shut up and  I read some of our  posts there sort of leading to how  awful that was.
YES, in the 1980's, 1990's  until  a  few years  after her death  ,mif that long, there were  books, comments from authors about  PC.

All that has ceased. NONE!! None of him. None of CPB. None of the lvijg   who  are still writing their  story as in their lives.
It  is open season on a long dead  woman  who  cannot  finish her story  . Digging for every little thing she said in private. How she sat in private. Wore . ANYTHING!!!!   She has no power. No voice and no voice from anyone, soooo go for it!!
NO, you did not say  she was not a good mother. I said she was and give her credit, authors, for that at least.  Some  FACTS-she  worked her role  in public and did well. She was a good mother.
Those are FACTS.

PROOF-fFACTS -Her dairy  of yearly work dates, patrons,comments from those  of  her  cahrities, causes,  etc. Her sons picking up some of her  charities, causes, etc.
PROOF- FACTS PH and PW  should  know whether or not if she was  a  good  mother to them  since they are her only  children.  Theynought to to know  rather than Arbitar, Bell, Junor, etc.  I did not know PD  also birthed Junor, Bell, Arbitar. She never mentioned them and so, I guess they do feel slighted since she made an obvious  difference with  them to PW and PH. LOL!!!!

You are right Canuck that  the authors wrote all on one subject  of BRF, the money maker of the time,and then after the public  is saturated with too much of that subject,  they   would write  about the next.  This was the way  it  used to be.

The appers  would  praise  PD and later to  reverse in favor of PC. Again. Viceversa. Praise  PC and  slam PD.  I get it  how it used to be.

PC and CPB  are living and were living then. No books  about them. Why?
They  are  alive. They are the POWER.  Side with the Monarchy, Power, Crown.
It seems so medievel, but these  people  it seems still want a place at court. To be at court, inside, invties, interviews  etc...there is something they  are trying to get  . So  slam a  longtime dead woman. No one is there to  defend her.
I get it!!!

I have also said  before  many times, wait or it ...it  is coming.
The books saying that  PW and PH  were so young when their mother died, and CPB  was really  longer in their lives than PD was. It is  Queen Camilla who  made a lasting imapct  on their lvies and brought  a  full family  to the young princes with her children.  it was a change , but a wlecomed on for the young princes  in  stability, calmess of  HRH, Queen  Camilla, and  it why  the  princes married  the women they  did. All  a  true  and honest reflection of  HRH Queen Camilla's  imprint in their lives and  her   asute mothering skills  on the princes. It  is really due  to her   for their upbringing. She  did well with her two  children and  helepd  guide PC . 
New book  coming you guys...The Other Mother.

sandy

Quote from: Eri on October 02, 2014, 07:37:48 AM
I love it !!! The man certainly kept it real ... this I suspect was the REAL Di her adoring public didn't get to see ...

No big surprises there Eri. Another book for your library.

Double post auto-merged: October 02, 2014, 01:49:14 PM


Quote from: Canuck on October 02, 2014, 05:58:45 AM
I'm confused -- unless we're reading different articles, Lord Bell doesn't say anything about whether Diana was a good mother.  And on the whole, the excerpts from Arbiter's book are at least as critical of Charles as they are of Diana (who he called a devoted mother, by the way, and repeatedly praised for how good she was with Will and Harry).

Yes, there have been some books critical of Diana in recent years.  But before that there were a LOT of books critical of Charles.  One side of the story gets told, and once that's been milked dry others in the press turn around and tell the other side of the story.

It doesn't mean the authors are just trying to get honours.  It's not unique to Diana.  It's just how the world works.  People have different opinions and when one side has its say, the other side wants to tell how it sees things differently.

Charles is alive and has a PR team. That is well documented. And people want to curry favor with a future King. No use trying to curry favor with a dead woman. It is not as simple as that. Charles is holding all the cards.

I  never saw a LOT of books critical of Charles. And even before Diana passed on. Charles himself authorized the most unflattering book: The Prince of Wales by Dimbleby. Ironically. It made him look like a petulant whinger.

Double post auto-merged: October 02, 2014, 01:50:17 PM


Quote from: cate1949 on October 02, 2014, 04:39:13 AM
what a wicked man - well - wicked sense of observation -

interesting story about Al Fayed - the conspiracy types will make some hay out of that

as for his remarks about Diana - she is a historic figure and like all historic figures she is fair game for compliments and criticisms - her status to some as secular saint does not get her an exemption - public figures living and dead - especially dead - will be given the measure of history.  Consider the stuff said about Louis Mountbatten.  Oh yes - James Whitaker in his book claimed he had told Diana to cultivate the head down eyes up look she did so often after seeing some pics of her in that pose early after the marriage - he said he told her it was utterly disarming. 

Diana made up the look by herself. Even in the earliest photographs. It was not exactly Whitaker's idea.

Double post auto-merged: October 02, 2014, 01:51:21 PM


Quote from: Canuck on October 02, 2014, 04:25:16 AM
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on October 02, 2014, 03:57:26 AM
It  is FACT  that  PD :
married PC was born of the nobility
had  PW  early  on  in her marriage
worked while pregnant  in her  BRF duties
always  performed her BRF duties with a  smile, grace
was personable  with  her subjects and the public worldwide, took on  projects
was welcomed  by other R and  Govt. officials
was a good mother to HER sons
did not falter uner the public pressure in her professional role
took lessons  for speech
took lessons a speech in  Welsh
took lessons eye contact in speaking
a   full yrly. diary/schedule   of  working dates, places, meetings, tours, etc.
no pics of her  top (breast)  and bottom (behind).

I don't agree that all of these things are facts.  Diana "did not falter under the public pressure" is certainly what I would call an opinion; it's a subjective judgment, not an objective fact (and one that a lot of people would disagree with).  Whether Diana was a good mother -- similarly, that's an opinion.  Some people will think she was, some people will think she was not. 

Are any of us Diana's children? I did not t hink so. Only William and Harry can make the call and I have only heard positive things said about their mother (from W and H).

Double post auto-merged: October 02, 2014, 01:54:15 PM


Quote from: Canuck on October 02, 2014, 01:44:57 AM
Quote from: sandy on October 02, 2014, 01:31:36 AM
What polls? None are definitive unless every single person is questioned. It is all speculation.

That isn't how polls work.  There is never, ever an opinion poll that asks every single person their opinion.  Nor is it necessary to do so.  Using statistical methods and random samples of the population, a poll can tell you within a margin of error (usually a few percentage points) what the results for the entire population would be.

That's not controversial.  This has been studied and tested and works on proven methods.  If you refuse to accept opinion polls of any kind, that's a very strange and anti-science and -math position to take.

But you obviously don't think all polls are useless, because I've seen you on many occasions refer to polls that say Diana was popular, Charles was disliked, etc.  Which leads me to conclude that you only reject polls when public opinion doesn't agree with your opinions.

In this case it would have to be a definitive poll. It is not known who is polled, what age groups, etc. Younger generations may not even care about an elderly woman who is Duchess of Cornwall and just say yes she is popular.

All I know is I see lots of negative comments about Camilla but I suppose they don't mean anything.

There is such a thing as the census surveys which are the most definitive questionnaires. I think Charles PR people's method is to inform the populace without proof that people are warming up to Camilla. And some buy into this.

Canuck

QuoteIn this case it would have to be a definitive poll. It is not known who is polled, what age groups, etc. Younger generations may not even care about an elderly woman who is Duchess of Cornwall and just say yes she is popular.

All I know is I see lots of negative comments about Camilla but I suppose they don't mean anything.

There is such a thing as the census surveys which are the most definitive questionnaires. I think Charles PR people's method is to inform the populace without proof that people are warming up to Camilla. And some buy into this.

Yes, there is such a thing as a census that involves talking to every single person.  That happens once every ten years in the UK and is done primarily to collect demographic data (race, age, religion, sexual orientation, country of origin, language usage, etc.).  Census surveys do not ask questions like "do you approve of this public figure" -- the work is too expensive and burdensome for things like that, and happens too infrequently to really be of much use.

Regular polls, using a sample of the population and statistical methods, are used for those types of opinion questions.  Not just about the monarchy, but about politicians, which way people plan to vote, how they feel about social issues of the day (whether the country should go to war, whether same-sex marriage should be legalized, etc.).  Depending on the methodology, polls can be more or less reliable.  But a number of very reputable firms have done a lot of polling on Camilla over the years.  We have clear data as to how the population thinks.

Of course that doesn't mean that every single person loves Camilla -- the polls themselves say that (obviously if 60% of people liked her, that would mean there is still 40% that don't like her).  No one disputes that some people don't like her, and that some of those people post negative comments online.  But to figure out how MANY people don't like her, polls are infinitely more reliable than counting up the comments made on these forums or on online newspapers (which is a very small, non-random sample of the population, with the same people tending to comment over and over).

Here, for example, is an Ipsos MORI poll (a very reputable firm that does a lot of political polling) from 1999:  Ipsos MORI | Poll | Attitudes towards Camilla Parker Bowles  It showed that the population was about evenly split as to whether Charles and Camilla should marry and that 76% did not want her to become Queen.  It also showed that more than half of people approved of Camilla's behavior after Diana's death, and that 65% thought Charles and Camilla should continue their relationship.

And here's a YouGov poll (again, a very reputable general polling firm) from earlier this year:  Camilla can become 'Queen', say public  It shows that 53% now support Camilla becoming Queen, with 32% saying she should have a lesser title when Charles takes the throne.  As expected, those who are older are more opposed to Camilla being Queen, and women are also slightly more opposed than men.

You're not required to agree with the majority's opinion in those polls -- I certainly don't agree with a lot of things my fellow citizens think!  But there's a difference between disagreeing with the opinions, and disagreeing that the opinions exist.  They do. 

sandy

These polls vary. And I don't think people can go by these surveys. I think the Charles PR method is to merely state that people are warming up to her and some buy this without any polls.

Besides which the polls are pointless, however many people agree or disagree about her being Queen Consort. she is set to be Queen Consort anyway. So what's the use of the polls in any case. If it were 60 for against do you honestly think Charles will try to diminish her title? No way.

Canuck

I agree that even if the majority of the public were against it, Camilla would likely become Queen when Charles becomes King.

But that's a totally separate question from whether the majority of the public is in fact against it.  There have been some polls going either way, but in general the trend has been toward more people being fine with it.  Charles may have worked to sway public opinion (as would be expected), but that doesn't mean he's inventing poll results that don't exist.

amabel

I don't believe that most people give Cam 2 thoguths, nowadays.  And I'd say the majority re in favour or at least not against her becoming queen when the queen goes...

Double post auto-merged: October 02, 2014, 06:26:40 PM


Quote from: Canuck on October 02, 2014, 04:25:16 AM
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on October 02, 2014, 03:57:26 AM
It

I don't agree that all of these things are facts.  Diana "did not falter under the public pressure" is certainly what I would call an opinion; it's a subjective judgment, not an objective fact (and one that a lot of people would disagree with).  Whether Diana was a good mother -- similarly, that's an opinion.  Some people will think she was, some people will think she was not. 
I think that she was a good mother certainly, hardly perfect but a good one.  however I think she did very often falter under public pressure.  Who wouldn't?  She was openly tearful a couple of times on public engagements...In her early days she had to be coaxed out of the car on the Wales tour.. She did work during her pregnancy but she took time off afterwards and wasn't seen in public often for a while. S he turned up after the queen at a Remembrance Day service IIRC.

sandy

Nobody saw Diana being coaxed out of the car except Charles and those assigned to them for the tour. The coaxing out of the car  happened One Time. When she got out she instantly went out and did extremely well and the public took to her. She teared up during the stress of the approaching divorce. Who can blame her?

So Diana for 99 percent of the time did extremely well and was popular. Too popular after a while as far as Charles was concerned.

TLLK

Quote from: amabel on October 02, 2014, 06:23:10 PM
I don't believe that most people give Cam 2 thoguths, nowadays.  And I'd say the majority re in favour or at least not against her becoming queen when the queen goes...

Double post auto-merged: October 02, 2014, 06:26:40 PM


Quote from: Canuck on October 02, 2014, 04:25:16 AM
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on October 02, 2014, 03:57:26 AM
It

I don't agree that all of these things are facts.  Diana "did not falter under the public pressure" is certainly what I would call an opinion; it's a subjective judgment, not an objective fact (and one that a lot of people would disagree with).  Whether Diana was a good mother -- similarly, that's an opinion.  Some people will think she was, some people will think she was not. 
I think that she was a good mother certainly, hardly perfect but a good one.  however I think she did very often falter under public pressure.  Who wouldn't?  She was openly tearful a couple of times on public engagements...In her early days she had to be coaxed out of the car on the Wales tour.. She did work during her pregnancy but she took time off afterwards and wasn't seen in public often for a while. S he turned up after the queen at a Remembrance Day service IIRC.
Diana did have difficulty coping with the pressure prior to and after the wedding. Plus after the honeymoon she was newly pregnant and that brings a host of hormone induced tears.

amabel

True.  hardly surprising because the amount of attention she had was far more than the average new royal brirde.  and she coped pretty well but it would be nonsense to say that she never cracked a bit. 

Double post auto-merged: October 02, 2014, 08:20:22 PM


Quote from: Canuck on October 02, 2014, 12:57:10 AM
Somehow I really don't think Charles and Camilla sit around at home looking up every random bit of criticism of Diana so they can delight in it.  Not everyone's lives revolve around Diana.
are you kidding?  They probably put it out there!!!  :).  I'm sure they don't think about Diana much.. as a couple.  Charles probalby thinks about her at times.....

sandy

Quote from: TLLK on October 02, 2014, 07:44:05 PM
Quote from: amabel on October 02, 2014, 06:23:10 PM
I don't believe that most people give Cam 2 thoguths, nowadays.  And I'd say the majority re in favour or at least not against her becoming queen when the queen goes...

Double post auto-merged: October 02, 2014, 06:26:40 PM


Quote from: Canuck on October 02, 2014, 04:25:16 AM
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on October 02, 2014, 03:57:26 AM
It

I don't agree that all of these things are facts.  Diana "did not falter under the public pressure" is certainly what I would call an opinion; it's a subjective judgment, not an objective fact (and one that a lot of people would disagree with).  Whether Diana was a good mother -- similarly, that's an opinion.  Some people will think she was, some people will think she was not. 
I think that she was a good mother certainly, hardly perfect but a good one.  however I think she did very often falter under public pressure.  Who wouldn't?  She was openly tearful a couple of times on public engagements...In her early days she had to be coaxed out of the car on the Wales tour.. She did work during her pregnancy but she took time off afterwards and wasn't seen in public often for a while. S he turned up after the queen at a Remembrance Day service IIRC.
Diana did have difficulty coping with the pressure prior to and after the wedding. Plus after the honeymoon she was newly pregnant and that brings a host of hormone induced tears.

Which did not prevent her excelling at her earliest royal duties. The tears were not shed during the tours when she was pregnant with William. I recall photos  of her standing out in the rain and cold greeting people in Wales in Fall 1981.

Eri

I don't get why some are getting so angry at this guy ... Di was a self obsessed , vain woman with little to no formal education he tolled no lies ...