QuoteTry to see it from Camilla's point of view. She first became involved with the Prince of Wales in 1971. That's 43 years ago. For well over 30 of those years she was at best a shadowy figure whom Charles somehow failed to marry but who was considered in any case unsuitable by the Royal Family. At worst, she was vilified for her appearance, hissed at in public and blamed for wrecking the happiness of the late Diana, Princess of Wales. Even when, at last, she married the prince in April 2005, she was visibly quaking with nerves – if not terror.
Why would a woman endure all this and never once speak out or try to manipulate the press? There can only be one answer and it explains why, after such a long struggle, the British public has finally, and rightly, taken Camilla to their hearts. After all, we've come a long way from 'Camillagate' and the age of 'there were three of us in this marriage'. This year, for the second time, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, attended the State Opening of Parliament and was seated, with Prince Charles, at the Queen's right hand.
She was even wearing the Queen Mother's tiara. (It should be noted that, rather surprisingly, the Queen Mother didn't much like her: 'Elbows on the table, Camilla?' she remarked sharply when she finally agreed to meet her grandson's mistress.)
During the 2012 Diamond Jubilee, she was also prominent, sitting at the Queen's side in the carriage. Unquestionably, she has arrived. What's more, it looks as if the final hurdle has been surmounted, too, with the latest YouGov poll showing that a majority of Britons now support her becoming Queen Consort, if her husband succeeds his mother.
More: How Camilla won our hearts (http://www.lady.co.uk/people/profiles/4341-how-camilla-won-our-hearts)
Cindy
I think most people realize that Charles and Camilla are comfortable together, and they make each other happy.
I also think that many realize that Charles and Diana simply were not suited and would never have been able to make their marriage work; they just had very different expectations.
I object to the publishing of this item on the birthdate of Princess Diana.
The editors should have waited for a better date. This was deliberate manipulation of the press on the readers..... :catfight:
Quote from: cinrit on July 02, 2014, 10:41:13 PM
QuoteTry to see it from Camilla's point of view. She first became involved with the Prince of Wales in 1971. That's 43 years ago. For well over 30 of those years she was at best a shadowy figure whom Charles somehow failed to marry but who was considered in any case unsuitable by the Royal Family. At worst, she was vilified for her appearance, hissed at in public and blamed for wrecking the happiness of the late Diana, Princess of Wales. Even when, at last, she married the prince in April 2005, she was visibly quaking with nerves – if not terror.
Why would a woman endure all this and never once speak out or try to manipulate the press? There can only be one answer and it explains why, after such a long struggle, the British public has finally, and rightly, taken Camilla to their hearts. After all, we've come a long way from 'Camillagate' and the age of 'there were three of us in this marriage'. This year, for the second time, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, attended the State Opening of Parliament and was seated, with Prince Charles, at the Queen's right hand.
She was even wearing the Queen Mother's tiara. (It should be noted that, rather surprisingly, the Queen Mother didn't much like her: 'Elbows on the table, Camilla?' she remarked sharply when she finally agreed to meet her grandson's mistress.)
During the 2012 Diamond Jubilee, she was also prominent, sitting at the Queen's side in the carriage. Unquestionably, she has arrived. What's more, it looks as if the final hurdle has been surmounted, too, with the latest YouGov poll showing that a majority of Britons now support her becoming Queen Consort, if her husband succeeds his mother.
More: How Camilla won our hearts (http://www.lady.co.uk/people/profiles/4341-how-camilla-won-our-hearts)
Cindy
According to various sources Camilla was not so "discreet" she gave her "side" the the Sun editor. She also actively undermined Princess Diana, badmouthing her to the Prince (some letters that came into public domain show this) and usurped Diana's position as Hostess at Highgrove.
What did Camilla "endure?" She got most of what Diana had, while mistress she got jewels from the Prince and could call the shots.
I think it presumptuous of the writer to tell the public how they think about Camilla.
Philip was sick so Charles foisted Camilla on the Queen in that carriage.
This is really propaganda and not accurate either.
Double post auto-merged: July 03, 2014, 12:18:18 AM
Quote from: Sandor on July 02, 2014, 11:58:25 PM
I think most people realize that Charles and Camilla are comfortable together, and they make each other happy.
I also think that many realize that Charles and Diana simply were not suited and would never have been able to make their marriage work; they just had very different expectations.
Camilla by butting in made sure Diana and Charles would not make their marriage work. Charles was getting marital advice from the greedy self serving woman. How happy the woman makes Charles is subject to speculation. Camilla had a lot riding on Charles marriage to Diana not working.
How do you know the marriage would not have worked if Camilla had not butted in? It's like saying a man would have lost his money anyway when a thief steals his wallet.
Sandor, how can you make statements that "most people" think a certain way. There are no definitive surveys how people feel about C and C. It is an opinion and your projection not a "fact."
Don't know if this information was shared here but the newest UK Government Poll shows that 53% believe that she should have the title of Queen Consort, 32% believe it should be a lesser title ie: Princess Consort and 14% are undecided.
TBH I am a bit surprised that slightly more than 1/2 of the public feels this way, considering how Camilla started out in the BRF. However time has passed and it appears that those polled believe that she should be titled Queen Camilla when the PoW becomes king.
Quote from: Sandor on July 02, 2014, 11:58:25 PM
I think most people realize that Charles and Camilla are comfortable together, and they make each other happy.
I also think that many realize that Charles and Diana simply were not suited and would never have been able to make their marriage work; they just had very different expectations.
That is a good observaton sandor.
Quote from: TLLK on July 03, 2014, 12:45:46 AM
Don't know if this information was shared here but the newest UK Government Poll shows that 53% believe that she should have the title of Queen Consort, 32% believe it should be a lesser title ie: Princess Consort and 14% are undecided.
So there...53% is most people! :yesss:
Quote from: TLLK on July 03, 2014, 12:45:46 AM
Don't know if this information was shared here but the newest UK Government Poll shows that 53% believe that she should have the title of Queen Consort, 32% believe it should be a lesser title ie: Princess Consort and 14% are undecided.
TBH I am a bit surprised that slightly more than 1/2 of the public feels this way, considering how Camilla started out in the BRF. However time has passed and it appears that those polled believe that she should be titled Queen Camilla when the PoW becomes king.
Again, it is not a definitive census like survey. Also it does not gauge "fondness" for the woman.
Double post auto-merged: July 03, 2014, 02:37:30 AM
Quote from: Sandor on July 03, 2014, 12:54:24 AM
Quote from: TLLK on July 03, 2014, 12:45:46 AM
Don't know if this information was shared here but the newest UK Government Poll shows that 53% believe that she should have the title of Queen Consort, 32% believe it should be a lesser title ie: Princess Consort and 14% are undecided.
So there...53% is most people! :yesss:
So what? It is not a survey of everybody in the UK so I would not take it as definitive.
There have never been census door to door type surveys. I think it fair to say that some like her, some don't and some don't care. The exact percentages are not known.
Double post auto-merged: July 03, 2014, 02:39:33 AM
Quote from: TLLK on July 03, 2014, 12:46:16 AM
Quote from: Sandor on July 02, 2014, 11:58:25 PM
I think most people realize that Charles and Camilla are comfortable together, and they make each other happy.
I also think that many realize that Charles and Diana simply were not suited and would never have been able to make their marriage work; they just had very different expectations.
That is a good observaton sandor.
I disagree. It is like saying a thief was justified in theft because the one he took the money from would have lost it anyway. I think another woman lurking about would put a damper on any marriage. Charles got what he wanted from Diana--the heirs and he ditched her for Camilla. Charles had his cake and ate it too. How people can try to justify what these two did is beyond me.
Double post auto-merged: July 03, 2014, 02:43:38 AM
Quote from: TLLK on July 03, 2014, 12:45:46 AM
Don't know if this information was shared here but the newest UK Government Poll shows that 53% believe that she should have the title of Queen Consort, 32% believe it should be a lesser title ie: Princess Consort and 14% are undecided.
TBH I am a bit surprised that slightly more than 1/2 of the public feels this way, considering how Camilla started out in the BRF. However time has passed and it appears that those polled believe that she should be titled Queen Camilla when the PoW becomes king.
To me the poll is futile. It makes no difference since the Prince is going to do as he pleases anyway. I am not getting how you think this poll represents the feelings of everybody in the UK. It is no census. I'm not surprised at these polls, who took them, maybe a lot of the Palace staff got to vote.
Quote from: DaFluffs on July 03, 2014, 12:01:14 AM
I object to the publishing of this item on the birthdate of Princess Diana.
The editors should have waited for a better date. This was deliberate manipulation of the press on the readers..... :catfight:
I agree, regardless of how anyone feels about either woman, it is tacky, insensitive, inelegant, crass and rude to publish it on this date.
I am glad my girl is getting some love finally she deserves it !!! She has been nothing but a good wife and and a good Royal all this Years go Cam !!! :Jen:
Honestly I think how the public really feels about Camilla will be known once Charles ascends the throne and reality sets in. To be honest I was amused by the authors assertion that Camilla never manipulated the press I suppose the author never heard of Stuart Higgins or Charles choice of spin doctor Camilla went along with Mark Bolland.
I try not to dislike Camilla. I really do. Time marches on and all that. Then I think of Camilla calling Higgins, week after week, month after month, dropping spiteful poisonous bulletins about Diana into his ear, under the guise of putting Charles's point of view. The image of a venomous snake in the grass pops into my mind every time.
Actually, Higgins said that he would call Camilla and ask "yes or no" questions, such as "is this true" or "did this happen". She'd say yes or no, and that was it. She did not contact him with gossip.
As for the poll results that TLLK mentioned, it's taken from a YouGov poll, which is known for it's accuracy.
QuoteCamilla Can Become 'Queen', Say Public
Most British people want Camilla to take on the traditional title of queen consort if Charles is crowned, rather than take a lesser title – but women are more divided on the issue than men
A new YouGov poll finds that the British public back giving the her the title of queen consort should Charles become king.
53% say Camilla should be queen consort, while 32% think she should be given a lesser title “out of sensitivity to Diana, the Princess of Wales”.
More: Camilla can become 'Queen', say public (http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/10/Camilla-can-become-Queen/)
Cindy
So, between 1982 and 1992, as Higgins stated in the book 'Forward, Camilla: Her True Story' ' she' (Camilla) 'guided me as to what might be right or wrong, with a clear bias in favour of the man she loved, Prince Charles. I am convinced that our conversations were consistently relayed to St James's Palace, so both the Prince and his most loyal courtiers could monitor the media's knowledge of the relationship...'
Sorry, but for me, that behaviour is being a snake in the grass. Camilla didn't begin this contact with Higgins after Diana and Charles became estranged, but early in the marriage, in the year of William's birth. Diana was just 21.
Quote from: Curryong on July 03, 2014, 11:50:13 AM
I try not to dislike Camilla. I really do. Time marches on and all that. Then I think of Camilla calling Higgins, week after week, month after month, dropping spiteful poisonous bulletins about Diana into his ear, under the guise of putting Charles's point of view. The image of a venomous snake in the grass pops into my mind every time.
Di wrote books and gave interviews behind Liz's back trying to destroy her all while living off Liz's dime ( the expression biting the hand that feeds you comes to mind) so are we really talking about venomous snakes in the grass? One shouldn't throw stones while Di lived in the glass house everything Cam did so did Di !!!
What about Charles deceit of Diana and his friends providing safe houses for C and C and being nice to Diana's face. The Queen Mum even encouraged them by lending them Birkhall for overnighters. And how about Charles sitting back and allowing Camilla to trash his wife (this was never done by earlier mistresses like Lily Langtry) and also Camilla feeling no compunction at usurping Diana's place at Hostess of Highgrove and Diana coming home and finding Camilla did some redecorating. I suppose it's OK for Diana to be treated this way. Charles friends were leaking stories about Diana for years with Charles apparent blessing. Charles discarded Diana like a peach pit after she had the heirs. How this selfish man can be defended is beyond me. I too see Camilla as a snake.
Double post auto-merged: July 03, 2014, 01:53:38 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 03, 2014, 12:20:25 PM
Actually, Higgins said that he would call Camilla and ask "yes or no" questions, such as "is this true" or "did this happen". She'd say yes or no, and that was it. She did not contact him with gossip.
As for the poll results that TLLK mentioned, it's taken from a YouGov poll, which is known for it's accuracy.
QuoteCamilla Can Become 'Queen', Say Public
Most British people want Camilla to take on the traditional title of queen consort if Charles is crowned, rather than take a lesser title – but women are more divided on the issue than men
A new YouGov poll finds that the British public back giving the her the title of queen consort should Charles become king.
53% say Camilla should be queen consort, while 32% think she should be given a lesser title "out of sensitivity to Diana, the Princess of Wales".
More: Camilla can become 'Queen', say public (http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/10/Camilla-can-become-Queen/)
Cindy
Yes or no answers can tell a lot depending on what the question is.
Double post auto-merged: July 03, 2014, 01:55:18 PM
Quote from: Eri on July 03, 2014, 07:58:32 AM
I am glad my girl is getting some love finally she deserves it !!! She has been nothing but a good wife and and a good Royal all this Years go Cam !!! :Jen:
She was sure not a good wife to Andrew Parker Bowles and I doubt she would have pursued Charles if he had been merely Charles Jones. The woman manipulated and slept her way to the top. "Finally" getting love? Eri, what are you talking about? Plenty of sycophants have heaped praise on that woman for years, particularly Charles cronies.
Double post auto-merged: July 03, 2014, 02:00:49 PM
Quote from: Curryong on July 03, 2014, 01:07:00 PM
So, between 1982 and 1992, as Higgins stated in the book 'Forward, Camilla: Her True Story' ' she' (Camilla) 'guided me as to what might be right or wrong, with a clear bias in favour of the man she loved, Prince Charles. I am convinced that our conversations were consistently relayed to St James's Palace, so both the Prince and his most loyal courtiers could monitor the media's knowledge of the relationship...'
Sorry, but for me, that behaviour is being a snake in the grass. Camilla didn't begin this contact with Higgins after Diana and Charles became estranged, but early in the marriage, in the year of William's birth. Diana was just 21.
Stephen Barry wrote that Charles put in calls to Camilla while he was on honeymoon with Diana at Balmoral. Charles and Camilla also were meeting up at hunts.
What was creepy is that Charles himself admitted he called Camilla to tell her Diana was pregnant with William. It's as if he was telling her she didn't have much longer to wait, since the heir was coming soon then there would be the spare.
She has certainly won my loyalty, love and affection over the years. I remember how strongly I felt about her marrying the Prince of Wales all those years ago. You only have to look at my posts on the matter to see how strongly against I was...
Quote from: cinrit on July 03, 2014, 12:20:25 PM
Actually, Higgins said that he would call Camilla and ask "yes or no" questions, such as "is this true" or "did this happen". She'd say yes or no, and that was it. She did not contact him with gossip.
As for the poll results that TLLK mentioned, it's taken from a YouGov poll, which is known for it's accuracy.
QuoteCamilla Can Become 'Queen', Say Public
Most British people want Camilla to take on the traditional title of queen consort if Charles is crowned, rather than take a lesser title – but women are more divided on the issue than men
A new YouGov poll finds that the British public back giving the her the title of queen consort should Charles become king.
53% say Camilla should be queen consort, while 32% think she should be given a lesser title "out of sensitivity to Diana, the Princess of Wales".
More: Camilla can become 'Queen', say public (http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/10/Camilla-can-become-Queen/)
Cindy
Thank you Cindy. The YouGov poll results should be IMO considered an accurate account of how members of the public were feeling about a very wide range of issues when the questions were asked. Next year there may be different results.
^^^Windsor when did you realize your opinion toward Camilla was changing?
I did not mean to crate crazy war! just I don't believe this article! clam down it not that serious MOD!!!!!
The more I got to know about her, the more I saw her, and the closer I followed her activities. I slowly realised how truly wrong we all were, and how the Duchess was truly a victim of a very spiteful media.
The article posted at the start of this thread isn't a propaganda article at all, it is however an accurate description of how many people have been charmed by the Duchess. I relate very well to the words expressed in the article, as I am one of those people who have gone from disliking her, to actually enjoying her presence, and role within the Monarchy. I look forward to her one day being Crowned Queen alongside the Prince of Wales!
I was totally against her, too, at the beginning. But observing her over the past few years has changed my mind. I believe she'll make a fine Consort.
Cindy
Thank you Windsor and I believe that you have provided a good summary of what many people polled by YouGov might have thought as well.
I don't get this ... the woman got with Chuck the same time Di was doing Hewitt she didn't break any home it was already destroyed (if it had existed in the first place) she is the victim of a spiteful , nasty media who WANTED to cast her as the evil mistress but we all know better here ... she had handled it all with grace and has never given her side of the story (which I think would have been interesting to say the least) ...
Eri, I have news. Charles admitted he was involved with Camilla when she was married and before he married Diana. He told this to his authorized biographer Dimbleby. Diana and Hewitt both admitted that 1986 was the date they got involved. Seven years after 1979 when Charles got involved with Camilla. I think he cheated on Diana when he married her knowing he preferred Camilla (he told his biographer of his feelings for Camilla at the time of his marriage). It's all out there Eri. Eri, again what are you talking about? The media has practically raised Camilla to sainthood. There are people bucking for honors after Charles becomes King. I did not see any bad press. Diana gets slammed though and she's dead and can't defend herself. Even you write things about her that are not true and belied by evidence. Camilla was never out of Charles' life really after he married Diana. After Charles got the heir and spare he was through with Diana. The home was destroyed because Charles could not let go of Camilla. The marriage had a fighting chance had there not been a third party around "for Charles."
Quote from: Windsor on July 03, 2014, 02:46:32 PM
The more I got to know about her, the more I saw her, and the closer I followed her activities. I slowly realised how truly wrong we all were, and how the Duchess was truly a victim of a very spiteful media.
The article posted at the start of this thread isn't a propaganda article at all, it is however an accurate description of how many people have been charmed by the Duchess. I relate very well to the words expressed in the article, as I am one of those people who have gone from disliking her, to actually enjoying her presence, and role within the Monarchy. I look forward to her one day being Crowned Queen alongside the Prince of Wales!
Since Charles made her non-negotiable the articles and books criticizing her have been few and far between.
I respect your opinion but sorry, I don't see the Duchess as a victim. She knew exactly what she was doing and did not suffer any "consequences" in fact she got rewarded. I don't think you should speak for the rest of us. I disagree with your assessment of her for one thing. If you like her fine but I still see the article as propaganda and does not portray the entire story.
Of course she'll be crowned Queen, no doubt about that. I had no doubt even when Charles claimed she'd be Princess Consort.
Camilla was the architect of Charles' adultery and treatment of a Diana, she did not become a Saint...
I agree Limabeany. Some people wring their hands over "poor" Camilla. Some victim! She saw out the first wife and the other mistress Lady Kanga. She is no victim. Not by a long shot. And all the fawning articles won't change that.
Quote from: TLLK on July 03, 2014, 02:41:34 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 03, 2014, 12:20:25 PM
Actually, Higgins said that he would call Camilla and ask "yes or no" questions, such as "is this true" or "did this happen". She'd say yes or no, and that was it. She did not contact him with gossip.
As for the poll results that TLLK mentioned, it's taken from a YouGov poll, which is known for it's accuracy.
QuoteCamilla Can Become 'Queen', Say Public
Most British people want Camilla to take on the traditional title of queen consort if Charles is crowned, rather than take a lesser title – but women are more divided on the issue than men
A new YouGov poll finds that the British public back giving the her the title of queen consort should Charles become king.
53% say Camilla should be queen consort, while 32% think she should be given a lesser title "out of sensitivity to Diana, the Princess of Wales".
More: Camilla can become 'Queen', say public (http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/10/Camilla-can-become-Queen/)
Cindy
Thank you Cindy. The YouGov poll results should be IMO considered an accurate account of how members of the public were feeling about a very wide range of issues when the questions were asked. Next year there may be different results.
Why? It is a sample, you don't know who was surveyed and it does not represent every single person in the UK let's get real about this poll. If the poll was of Camilla critical I can see the Camilla people protesting that the poll was not accurate. Pro or con surveys such as these are not inclusive of all people in the UK.
Double post auto-merged: July 03, 2014, 04:29:48 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 03, 2014, 12:20:25 PM
Actually, Higgins said that he would call Camilla and ask "yes or no" questions, such as "is this true" or "did this happen". She'd say yes or no, and that was it. She did not contact him with gossip.
As for the poll results that TLLK mentioned, it's taken from a YouGov poll, which is known for it's accuracy.
QuoteCamilla Can Become 'Queen', Say Public
Most British people want Camilla to take on the traditional title of queen consort if Charles is crowned, rather than take a lesser title – but women are more divided on the issue than men
A new YouGov poll finds that the British public back giving the her the title of queen consort should Charles become king.
53% say Camilla should be queen consort, while 32% think she should be given a lesser title "out of sensitivity to Diana, the Princess of Wales".
More: Camilla can become 'Queen', say public (http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/10/Camilla-can-become-Queen/)
Cindy
She still spoke to the press no matter how you slice it. The questions could have been probing. She had no business doing this even if she burst into song with Higgins. She was a snake.
Double post auto-merged: July 03, 2014, 04:34:32 PM
Quote from: TLLK on July 03, 2014, 02:41:34 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 03, 2014, 12:20:25 PM
Actually, Higgins said that he would call Camilla and ask "yes or no" questions, such as "is this true" or "did this happen". She'd say yes or no, and that was it. She did not contact him with gossip.
As for the poll results that TLLK mentioned, it's taken from a YouGov poll, which is known for it's accuracy.
QuoteCamilla Can Become 'Queen', Say Public
Most British people want Camilla to take on the traditional title of queen consort if Charles is crowned, rather than take a lesser title – but women are more divided on the issue than men
A new YouGov poll finds that the British public back giving the her the title of queen consort should Charles become king.
53% say Camilla should be queen consort, while 32% think she should be given a lesser title "out of sensitivity to Diana, the Princess of Wales".
More: Camilla can become 'Queen', say public (http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/10/Camilla-can-become-Queen/)
Cindy
Thank you Cindy. The YouGov poll results should be IMO considered an accurate account of how members of the public were feeling about a very wide range of issues when the questions were asked. Next year there may be different results.
TLK the poll makes no sense. Diana was never Queen Consort so the "sensitivity" makes no sense. Camilla did not use Princess of Wales because Diana used it. Again the poll is inconclusive since it does not represent the viewpoints of every citizen of the UK (like a census).
Quote from: sandy on July 03, 2014, 04:27:13 PM
Why? It is a sample, you don't know who was surveyed and it does not represent every single person in the UK let's get real about this poll. If the poll was of Camilla critical I can see the Camilla people protesting that the poll was not accurate. Pro or con surveys such as these are not inclusive of all people in the UK.
To be fair, there have been many polls, both known for accuracy and not, that have reported Camilla as the least popular Royal, or reported that people didn't want her to be Queen Consort, and no one denied those polls' accuracy.
Cindy
she hasnt won my heart!
to me she will always be "the other woman" the one who got into a marriage and broke it appart ( even when that marriage was doomed , she , in my book is a..........
For me - when I see someone in the press whom I really don't like and see what I believe to be destruction of other people at their hands - I wish for karma.
My wish for Camilla is to be faced with a nemesis exactly like herself. Then lets see how well she carries herself to others....
Quote from: cinrit on July 03, 2014, 12:20:25 PM
Actually, Higgins said that he would call Camilla and ask "yes or no" questions, such as "is this true" or "did this happen". She'd say yes or no, and that was it. She did not contact him with gossip.
As for the poll results that TLLK mentioned, it's taken from a YouGov poll, which is known for it's accuracy.
QuoteCamilla Can Become 'Queen', Say Public
Most British people want Camilla to take on the traditional title of queen consort if Charles is crowned, rather than take a lesser title – but women are more divided on the issue than men
A new YouGov poll finds that the British public back giving the her the title of queen consort should Charles become king.
53% say Camilla should be queen consort, while 32% think she should be given a lesser title "out of sensitivity to Diana, the Princess of Wales".
More: Camilla can become 'Queen', say public (http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/10/Camilla-can-become-Queen/)
Cindy
Any one with common sense would realize that although Higgins said he called Camilla why would he have done so in the first place? Camilla had to let it be known among friends that she would love a media contact I doubt he just looked in a phone book for her number as most people know the POW's friends at that time didn't talk to the media or they were out. Lets see if there is a better excuse.
^^ Not an "excuse", but a difference of opinion. :thumbsup: And how do we know he didn't contact other friends and had no luck? We don't.
Cindy
I thought the article was negative and not a positive story about Camilla. It lists rumors as facts.
Camilla had me since 1989. Liked the name, then liked the woman.
Windsor, I will looking into your old posts. :orchid:
I do not get some of you , your understanding. How can you not separate fact from fiction, side with the husband and girlfriend...I do not know. I said before, I don't know, maybe some here ummm, like that kind of thing and have been , are, or support family, friends who see a man they want and if a wife is there, so what! Marital bounds don't mean much!
Take it , it takes two, the husband and another woman to play that game.
Hey, some people are like that. Just say'in.
I do not see why some of you cannot see the grey area and the TRUTH as well.
This poll, that poll, the next poll when she has her coronation in 10 or so years, none of it matters.
If the majority of the people love, like, accept, do not like,Camila, so what! She will be Camilla, Queen of England.
Not princess, lady, nothing second fiddle. BRF-Monarchy is NOT up for vote or matters if the people like it, want it or not. THATIS NOT A MONARCHY!!!
She will be married to the King.
She will be received by ther subjects of The UK and heads of state, world leaders, other monarchs as Camilla, Queen of England. Queen Camilla.
YES, she and PC are happy. YES, they are in love. YES, they dated, had a connection and moved on AS MANY PEOPLE do.
LOVE in 1970's when they met, dated, I would say NO. they stayed friends. Fine some people do. Their world is small and that is ok. YES, all hail DofCornwall Camilla , the QEII EVEN QEII HAS to accept her, PP, PH, K, PW, PAnne, PE, SRJ, the butcher, baker, candlestick maker, etc. because she is in the roll as Wife to PC and will be Q and is due that respect whether they want to or not. It is irrelevant, for sake of conversation, if they want to or do not. EVEN QEII, a mother and the mother to PC had to allow this marraige. What was she going to do,could do? Nothing. She is QoE, but she is also just a mother and she spoils her kids.
I think the only people in the Kingdom who do not accept her are PD's sisters and brother, but then they do not matter. They are most likely not in and friends with any of the nobility or anything. LOL!!! It seems very medival, but one wants to be as close to the Crown as one can be . One sides with the Crown.
PC found someone to marry and who wanted him, loved him, wanted him, tried to be all she could for him. That was PD.
FACT , he never gave it a chance. Why? His Royal Ego, and Camilla, Dear friend was ALWAYS there. AWAYS.
THINK, if you were Camilla, would you ahve wanted that marriage to work??! HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That would shut you out.
If you were Camilla, If I WERE Camilla, would you, I have wanted that marraige to work? Hell NO!!!!!!!
of course not!!!
FACT-PC enver gave it a try. Camila made sure he never did.
Fred PC and glays Camilla went on the honeymoon. PD went along to get deflowered and start the babyhier making. Sorry for being vulgar, but it is, was the truth.
Things in common. That is such BS that they were doomed from the start. Had nothing in common? That is just rubbish as ya'll say from Camilla PC fans and BRF reporters who are making sure they get in while the geting in is good and early. Jump on the bandwagon. Brownosing. PC and PD had in common....Hmm, love of the Arts, nobility, their children, the people- their subjects, the country life, love of work for their subejcts as Senior Royals, being the Beauty and the Brains of a SuperPower Couple, etc. The list of what they had to build on, on what they had in common was endless.
Hewitt to Dodi was after the fact. YES, PD handled it all wrong. She was young ad had no one to advise her.She wa sof that world, but caught up nas a young woman in this wolrd of the then early 1980's.
IF I or YOU were her sister, friend, mother though she did not really have one, stepmother, my adice would ahve been find a Lord/Duke of the kingdom adn be descret. A united, unified, lovely, kiss him, hold his hand in public on ntorus and do not fight him about her. Eventualy, it will run nits course and he might turnn to nyou or find someone else. LOL! Find someone of your choice for him. LOL. Hey, these peoples' lives are not like ours. I am just say'ing PD handled it all wrong. Hindsight now.
Cam and PC to me are very lucky people. WOW . I know some people like that in real life and I am sure you do too who have done, do everything under the sun , have done wrong, wronged people, and have wonderful luck. Everything comes up their way.
PC and remind me of that. Honey, some people get it all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is life!!! I am not going to do wrong or wrong others or whatever though. It is not my thing , choice to do. I wonder how Camila feels? Like wow! PD dying just clinched the deal.
NO, in fairness, they did not know PD was going to die. YES, PD, just not thinking smart of ended her life. Bad luck.
That is life!!
And here it is today. Camilla and PC are one. K and Q. She ahs all the glory, praise, riches, titles, EVEN PH and his family to come adn PW and his family to a point. While the boys LOVED LOVE their mother, they cannot , do not and should not fight what is. What can they do or not do about it? NOTHING! I mean when PC and C got married . When they moved in together before and after PD's death.
Nothing.
They have their livfes and PC and C cannot do, will not do, should not do anything about them either.
All I am saying is, please ya'll, do not buy into the new , twisted story by these reporters of how PC and C were star crossed lovers separated by time and rekindled an innocent love after PC was a widow and how C was there as a mother to help him raise his children and ..... None of that is the TRUTH.
All I am ALSO saying is yes, PC and C love each other. All the kingdom accepts it and the BRF does and if anyone does not, so what!! She will be Queen Camilla I and to King Charles #____. Yes, she will be Queen Camilla I, informally speaking. She will be the first Qof E named Camilla. That name will regein forever.
Maybe PGeroge will name his daughter Diana Camilla Elizabeth Spencer. Who knows !?!?!?
Double post auto-merged: July 04, 2014, 04:07:14 AM
Quote from: Queen Camilla on July 03, 2014, 10:38:38 PM
I thought the article was negative and not a positive story about Camilla. It lists rumors as facts.
Camilla had me since 1989. Liked the name, then liked the woman.
Windsor, I will looking into your old posts. :orchid:
QC,there is no doubt you think this woman is grand. Wonderful. That is fine . That is your opinion. I can never figure it out, why, but ok.
You just said, the lady won you over in 1989.
Hey, why say 1989. Go back to July 1981.
Ok. I do not know how old you are QC or background or anything.
I am not being insulting here.
I am just saying , that is all.
No, I cannot figure out all the hail Camilla, how thou great art she...adoration for her.
NO, I am not saying she doesn't deserve to live her life or should not be QC. Quite the opposite. I do say, HOWEVER, I simply cannot see the adoration, rights some of you all feel the poor lady, the poor dear had lost when PC and PD were married and all the injustice that was done to her by PD and how PD destroyed the Innocent CPB's life.
I do say though, I do not see how some people can pretend the facts of the story are erased because of time. Gone with time. Never happened. It is just logical to me.
?????
I am at a lost.
She has won some of you over with her work, style, above reproach demeanor...
Ok.
I do not see it. I just do not understand.
NO,I am not saying she and PC should not have married , she be QofE...quite the opposite. I just do not see how one can say how wonderful thou art is Queen Camila I, Queen Consort Camilla I, whatever her name. How wonderful is she and she was so wronged.
I just cannot see it. I cannot understand any of you, your reasoning of how this so-called, public relations made poor, innocent creature ....
LOL,it is laughable !!!!!!! Ludicrous!
Double post auto-merged: July 04, 2014, 04:15:01 AM
http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20104247,00.html
He never loved her. Oh boy!!
Double post auto-merged: July 04, 2014, 04:32:56 AM
http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20096470,00.html
June 1987, it was totally and privately officially OVER.
It was not totally, publically and officially over YET.
PW, H born. DONE! Job well done!! About 5 1/2 to 6 years , DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PC and C , the real pull, in why it was over. It was not official;y known then. Common sense now . We all know now what the public did officially know then. TPTB, the close circle of friends of PC and C , knew and helped.
I don't get why blame the fact Chuck and Di never had a real marriage on Cam ... she was just a distant friend with her own life when he married and had his children with her own family to worry about ... it's only when both marriages were over and Di was doing HEWITT that they got back together and who says otherwise has nothing, no proof just the will to be nasty about Camilla !!!
She was no "distant" friend according to Prince Charles. I suggest that you read the Dimbleby book. Charles made his feelings about the so-called "distant friend" known--in no uncertain terms. Charles admitted to his biographer he was intimate with Camilla ca. 1979 and preferred her to Diana. The intimacy with Diana stopped after she served her purpose and got the heir and spare. Please don't rewrite history Eri. Camilla never really was out of Charles life despite her having the husband and kiddies. Diana did not "do" Hewitt until Charles started shacking up with Camilla again. You have no proof of your contentions about Diana and you still apparently ignore Charles own thoughts on Camilla. Did you see photos of the "distant" friend trying to get buddy buddy with Lady Diana. I take it you did not. If you think she was a "distant friend" I might have a bridge to sell you. If Camilla were not manipulative and ruthless she would never be where she is today. The distant friend was named by sources as the woman Charles had an overnighter with on the royal train whilst he was dating Diana. And she sent those little trinkets on his honeymoon with Diana. And Anna Wallace dumped Charles ca. 1980 when he danced the night away with the "distant friend" Camilla. With a "distant" friend like Camilla who needs enemies?
^ There is no proof he had anything to do romantically with Cam before 1987 none whatsoever !!! This is ridiculous!!! Di had HEWITT Chuck had Cam no one in that mess was a Saint or a victim their marriage didn't work out and after Harry they both took lovers neither is "better" than the other ...
Eri, she was not a distant friend, an old girlfriend , an acquaitance and they ocassionaly saw each socially....
Fred Prince C and Gladys Camilla went on the honeymoon and PD tagged along...NO, Fred and Gladys were not there in the phsycial on the honeymoon, but emotionally, mentally, PC and C were together.
AB and CPB had LDS and PC over to their personal home for privacy during courtship.
C was close to PC, sahred close friends and she knew how to make him tick. IF I WERE Cam, would I have wanted, left that marriage to succeed? No way!!!
YES, PC is jsut as much to blame. PD said in her interview she was 50% blame , but no more and there were three of them in the marriage and it was a bit crowded. Sounds honest and she took 50% of the blame. What more is the left of trashing her ?To say?
The girl said she was wrong too. I assume thatmeans Hewitt , a bad choice. I assume that was not , perhaps doing as those do in her world which was grin and bare it , the humilation in their personal world and turn the other check or find a man from mher world and be decret. Marriage in name only.
CPB accompained, met up with LDS at , at elast one Polo match, lol we saw pictures of. The LDS looking downcast like a scolded Corgi by QEII.
Eei , your post just makes the point...some of you do not , perhaps know the story. Age here, but I was in my 20's during the 1980's. LOL.
Your post just brings up the point of rewriting the story of PC, C as two love lorn and lost lovers separated by time and his mother, TPTB her family, the media, the Lord Mountbatten and poor PC tricked into a loveless marriage by the tempest, shrew LDS. OH PLEASE!!!!!!!!
Hewitt, a bad choice by PD, was not on the scene in 1981, 82, etc. He come into the picture well after the fact.
---------------Like I said in my rather long post, I get it. PC and C do love each other. They will be K and Q. PD died, sadly, BUT YES yes YES life goes on. LIFE IS FOR THE LIVING. ---------------------------
STILL, I do not accept the rewrites of what was. That's all!!!
Double post auto-merged: July 04, 2014, 01:30:19 PM
Quote from: Eri on July 04, 2014, 01:17:49 PM
^ There is no proof he had anything to do romantically with Cam before 1987 none whatsoever !!! This is ridiculous!!! Di had HEWITT Chuck had Cam no one in that mess was a Saint or a victim their marriage didn't work out and after Harry they both took lovers neither is "better" than the other ...
It did not happen that way, but I cannot argue with you. Pointless. If C and PC told you and others on a tv show today , and they all but did, you still won't believe. The PD Saint shot is a cheap shot and shows your bias. Right there, you and some others cannot go beyond what you choose to believe which are simply not the facts. THE FACTS are out there in pictures, words of PC and C. BRF reporters who knew the FACTS and put them out there. See People magazines above and that was one our side of the poind. The Brit side had the story out long before.
That there prooves you cannot, won't read the truth of know of it. You refuse to see what has already been proven, said, written about and even said by PC and PD, etc.
Quote from: sandy on July 04, 2014, 11:45:35 AM
She was no "distant" friend according to Prince Charles. I suggest that you read the Dimbleby book. Charles made his feelings about the so-called "distant friend" known--in no uncertain terms. Charles admitted to his biographer he was intimate with Camilla ca. 1979 and preferred her to Diana. The intimacy with Diana stopped after she served her purpose and got the heir and spare. Please don't rewrite history Eri. Camilla never really was out of Charles life despite her having the husband and kiddies. Diana did not "do" Hewitt until Charles started shacking up with Camilla again. You have no proof of your contentions about Diana and you still apparently ignore Charles own thoughts on Camilla. Did you see photos of the "distant" friend trying to get buddy buddy with Lady Diana. I take it you did not. If you think she was a "distant friend" I might have a bridge to sell you. If Camilla were not manipulative and ruthless she would never be where she is today. The distant friend was named by sources as the woman Charles had an overnighter with on the royal train whilst he was dating Diana. And she sent those little trinkets on his honeymoon with Diana. And Anna Wallace dumped Charles ca. 1980 when he danced the night away with the "distant friend" Camilla. With a "distant" friend like Camilla who needs enemies?
:goodpost:
Quote from: Eri on July 04, 2014, 01:17:49 PM
^ There is no proof he had anything to do romantically with Cam before 1987 none whatsoever !!! This is ridiculous!!! Di had HEWITT Chuck had Cam no one in that mess was a Saint or a victim their marriage didn't work out and after Harry they both took lovers neither is "better" than the other ...
Charles told his biographer in an interview (that was published in the press ca. 1994): he was intimate with Camilla: early seventies, ca. 1979-80 and 1986. It is not ridiculous. If you want to rewrite history suit yourself. Charles is more to blame because he did not drop Camilla after he married Diana and admitted to his biographer he preferred Camilla at the time he married Diana. He used Diana as a broodmare. Ordinarily Diana and Charles could have divorced but as senior royals divorce was discouraged back then.
^ You mean the Year Di started with HEWITT ?
Charles indicated to his biographer he went back to Camilla in 1986. Diana got even later that year by getting involved with Hewitt. They felt a mutual attraction at the York's wedding in Summer 1986, after a month or so they became intimate. Charles certainly didn't care--he was shacking up with Camilla. Some sources said Charles was meeting secretly Camilla as early as 1983.
No matter how you slice it Charles was untrue to Diana from the get go. Charles told his biographer he felt forced to marry Diana and preferred Camilla. He could not commit to Diana fully (he wanted heirs from her primarily IMO) because he preferred Camilla. And no Diana did not know how things would turn out at the marriage. She thought the guy loved her because he swore to be faithful to her and love her in a wedding ceremony.
Did Charles say he "was forced" to marry Diana, or did he say he "felt pressured" to marry her? It's tempting to assume Charles was the first to stray in 1986, but to be fair, we simply do not know. The four people involved probably don't even know.
Cindy
He already cheated on Diana when he did not completely give up Camilla at the time of his marriage to Diana (she sent gifts to him, they kept in touch--he told his biographer he preferred her to Camilla--how does that make the wife feel when she realizes this after the wedding?). It's not tempting to say he was the first to stray by most accounts he did cheat first. In any event he used Diana to have the heirs, refused to have more children with her after Harry was born. Shifting the responsibility to Diana by accusing her of cheating first is a cop out because he already was dishonest with Diana at the time he married.
It's a matter of semantics, feeling forced to marry a woman is not exactly flattering to the woman involved. And some Charles followers do say he was "forced" to marry her.
Quote from: cinrit on July 03, 2014, 10:19:51 PM
^^ Not an "excuse", but a difference of opinion. :thumbsup: And how do we know he didn't contact other friends and had no luck? We don't.
Cindy
NO but we all know Camilla's motives at the time.How come no one has said they talked to Amanda Knatchbull, Lady Jane, Emilie VanCutsem the late Kanga it's all out there. As for who cheated first well Diana said that when Harry was born her whole marriage just went down the drain and Charles said he was faithful until the marriage was irretrievably broken down so as Diana said Charles went back to Camilla or as she put it his lady and both Hewitt and Diana said they became intimate in 86 so why all of a sudden is Camilla so acceptable is it because of those magic HRH before her name?.
Double post auto-merged: July 04, 2014, 08:53:12 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 04, 2014, 05:50:14 PM
Did Charles say he "was forced" to marry Diana, or did he say he "felt pressured" to marry her? It's tempting to assume Charles was the first to stray in 1986, but to be fair, we simply do not know. The four people involved probably don't even know.
Cindy
Ah actually he did and offered proof of a letter his father sent him telling him to make up his mind to either marry her or end it so as not to compromise her reputation since the media was becoming intolerable. Phillip to his credit did not force the issue he just advised Charles to make up his mind Charles in his never take responsibility for his mistakes blamed his father. Read Dimbleby
Quote from: Windsor on July 03, 2014, 02:39:12 PM
She has certainly won my loyalty, love and affection over the years. I remember how strongly I felt about her marrying the Prince of Wales all those years ago. You only have to look at my posts on the matter to see how strongly against I was...
I wasn't here back then but I also was strongly against him marrying her, I've done a complete 180 since then, not only was it good for him but I think she is good for the BRF.
Goodness that woman destroyed a young girl. I don't care how many updos or jewels she wears.
^ Personally I think her father destroyed the young girl agreeing on her marrying Chuck with wide open eyes about what awaited her that was vile ...
Yes, him and Camilla were both "vile".
Quote from: Trudie on July 04, 2014, 08:39:17 PM
NO but we all know Camilla's motives at the time.How come no one has said they talked to Amanda Knatchbull, Lady Jane, Emilie VanCutsem the late Kanga it's all out there. As for who cheated first well Diana said that when Harry was born her whole marriage just went down the drain and Charles said he was faithful until the marriage was irretrievably broken down so as Diana said Charles went back to Camilla or as she put it his lady and both Hewitt and Diana said they became intimate in 86 so why all of a sudden is Camilla so acceptable is it because of those magic HRH before her name?.
In my case, it's because I don't think being upset about something that happened so many years ago is productive. I also believe that people are not all bad, just like they're not all good, and that people are capable of atoning for whatever bad they did in the past and deserve to be forgiven.
Quote from: TrudieAh actually he did and offered proof of a letter his father sent him telling him to make up his mind to either marry her or end it so as not to compromise her reputation since the media was becoming intolerable. Phillip to his credit did not force the issue he just advised Charles to make up his mind Charles in his never take responsibility for his mistakes blamed his father. Read Dimbleby
I have read Dimbleby. As you say, Philip did not "force" Charles to marry Diana. But he did pressure him to. Slight difference, but a difference.
Cindy
It's a matter of semantics. Charles in any event felt "coerced" and I think he never wants to own up to any choices he makes he blames others.
In any case it was not a nice thing to say particularly since not only would it hurt Diana but their two children. Children would not take kindly to such statements.
Double post auto-merged: July 04, 2014, 11:03:29 PM
Quote from: Eri on July 04, 2014, 10:38:35 PM
^ Personally I think her father destroyed the young girl agreeing on her marrying Chuck with wide open eyes about what awaited her that was vile ...
Still Charles was the one who asked Diana out, courted her, proposed to her and married her. I doubt her father had a clue what would have happened to Diana in the marriage--nobody can predict the future. He thought that Charles would treat his daughter well.IMO.
Charles and Camilla were the people who did the most destruction.
Children would likely not take kindly to a lot of remarks both parties made.
Cindy
Cindy we're talking Charles here and I am answering your post about his complaints about being "forced" to marry Diana or "pressured" or whatever. Leaving semantics aside Cindy, Charles never professed to his biographer he married Diana for love and was eager to marry her. Saying he was Pressured Or Coerced is pretty insulting to a woman. Diana never said she felt pressured to marry Charles she always said she married him for love.
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on July 04, 2014, 10:20:22 PM
Quote from: Windsor on July 03, 2014, 02:39:12 PM
She has certainly won my loyalty, love and affection over the years. I remember how strongly I felt about her marrying the Prince of Wales all those years ago. You only have to look at my posts on the matter to see how strongly against I was...
I wasn't here back then but I also was strongly against him marrying her, I've done a complete 180 since then, not only was it good for him but I think she is good for the BRF.
I have not changed my view of her. I don't think she's "good" for the royal family not in the least. With Charles sulking and pouting the Queen who does not like unpleasantness agreed to the marriage. Her mother did not want a C and C marriage in her lifetime. However "good" or "bad" it is for Charles he is stuck with her--he did out her as his mistress and became more or less obligated after the PBs divorced.
In hindsight it would have been better for Diana to have taken her mother's advice to heart and not marry Charles. Frances appeared to have a better understanding of the BRF's expectations in the early 1980's and more likely knew about Charles' feelings for Camilla. Charles should have not pursued someone with very different interests from his own. :(
However this is about Camilla and how the public's opinion of her has changed in the past decade or so. Personally I didn't think that we'd be seeing government opinion polls reflecting that 53% of the public believe that she should be known as Queen Camilla in the future. I truly believed it would have been much further in the future.
Did you read Frances' authorized biography? She clearly stated that although she had reservations about Charles she said nothing to her daughter saying that it was "time" for Diana to get married. She did not warn Diana or advise her other than getting her daughter ready for the wedding she did not offer her advice. It is on record via her authorized biography. She clearly indicated she had a hands off attitude re: advising Diana about possibly backing out of the wedding.Surely if Diana expressed reservations to her sisters and got the answer bad luck, your face is on the tea towels too late to back out now, her mother would have at that point if she had reservations (which she said she did) would have spoken up.
Unfortunately Frances did nothing. Get a copy of the book and see for yourself.
But again this is not a definitive survey since it does not go door to door and get the entire population. It is also not known who was surveyed, for all we know Palace staff could have participated. It is not a definitive poll.
And again it does not matter because Charles will not want her to be Princess Consort as he previously stated. He just wanted to have the wedding and did not want to stir the waters. Also Diana was never Queen Consort so the whole basis of the poll holds no water. Why would it matter if Diana never held the title.
Re: the common interests. Charles interest in Diana was that he wanted a fertile, blue blooded, suitable girl with no past. Diana filled the bill. Camilla had a lot riding on the marriage not working out. And she undermined Diana all the way. Charles and Diana did both like classical music (Diana liked classical ballet and Italian opera) and both liked skiing and water sports. Without another woman in the way, I think Diana and Charles would have had a chance.
Quote from: cinrit on July 04, 2014, 10:52:56 PM
Quote from: Trudie on July 04, 2014, 08:39:17 PM
NO but we all know Camilla's motives at the time.How come no one has said they talked to Amanda Knatchbull, Lady Jane, Emilie VanCutsem the late Kanga it's all out there. As for who cheated first well Diana said that when Harry was born her whole marriage just went down the drain and Charles said he was faithful until the marriage was irretrievably broken down so as Diana said Charles went back to Camilla or as she put it his lady and both Hewitt and Diana said they became intimate in 86 so why all of a sudden is Camilla so acceptable is it because of those magic HRH before her name?.
In my case, it's because I don't think being upset about something that happened so many years ago is productive. I also believe that people are not all bad, just like they're not all good, and that people are capable of atoning for whatever bad they did in the past and deserve to be forgiven.
Quote from: TrudieAh actually he did and offered proof of a letter his father sent him telling him to make up his mind to either marry her or end it so as not to compromise her reputation since the media was becoming intolerable. Phillip to his credit did not force the issue he just advised Charles to make up his mind Charles in his never take responsibility for his mistakes blamed his father. Read Dimbleby
I have read Dimbleby. As you say, Philip did not "force" Charles to marry Diana. But he did pressure him to. Slight difference, but a difference.
Cindy
Cindy I am not upset about what happened years ago the past is what it is but I disagree about Camilla being capable of atoning for the bad she did in the past and no I do not believe she deserves to be forgiven. Camilla had no qualms usurping Diana as Charles wife and continued to do so after her death including wanting to attend her memorial service until public opinion squashed that not to mention the self satisfied smile she always puts on her face. Camilla may have won the hearts of those who fawn over the HRH but I see Camilla the woman not the HRH. IMO I do not believe she is the nice woman she puts herself out to be in public her prior actions speak volumes and a leopard does not change it spots.
On the Phillip issue he did not force or pressure him he just asked him to make up his mind it was Charles who later in a matter of self pity and again not wanting to take responsibility conveniently blamed his father.
I have always felt that Cams IS good for the BRF. It was a PR nightmare to get the public to accept her, which they have succeed in doing. Along the way, the RF has changed. They seemed to be in tuned with public opinion and more willing to adapt. It started with the days following Diana's death and accelerated during this PR campaign.
Charles is IMO a happy man. He seems more content and settled. I feel that Cams is behind that. And a happy man is going to be more willing to take on Kingship than the reluctant sullen and unhappy man from 30 - 40 years ago.
Cams is always going to be a hard sell with many people. Diana still is warm in many hearts. But the past happened, it can not be changed. If the RF has accepted Cams, I am willing to give her a chance. Afterall, they know her much better than any of us.
Charles looked happy with Diana in the early years. He was not always "sullen" around her.
What bothers me is that I have seen in so many comments that Charles is made "happy." Why is it so important that this man must be made happy? Why is it not about who the man makes happy. He sure didn't make his first wife "happy" and he treated his former mistress Lady Kanga abominably and would not talk to her even though she was gravely ill.
It is not known how Charles thinks or feels about Camilla at this stage. He is good at keeping up appearances. In any case he is not going to divorce her--he'd lose much credibility and there would be another scandal.
I don't think she's good for the royal family. The Queen made the best of a bad thing. I don't think she is exactly happy at how Camilla got into the royal family.
A lot of spin doctoring was applied to Camilla for years before she married Charles. Charles grandmother did not want a C and C wedding in her lifetime.
What turned me off is (and I agree with Trudie's post) was that Camilla apparently thought she did nothing wrong and was ready to walk into Diana's Memorial Service until stopped by public opinion.
If Charles were so all fired happy with her he could have married her in the early seventies --the man did not even tell her to wait for him when he went to sea. And no I don't buy that he would have been refused had he pushed to marry her when she was still Camilla Shand. He also had her as his mistress for many years and did not deem her suitable apparently to have his heirs. Charles wanted to have his cake and eat it too. He more or less forced the divorce of the PBs when he confessed to adultery with Camilla and he was obliged to marry her. Charles had to create this Great Thirty Year love story even though he was married to another woman, came close to marrying two other women, and had other mistresses.
How the other royals feel about Camilla is subject to speculation. They perhaps are cordial but it is no big love fest.
Quote from: Macrobug on July 05, 2014, 12:15:08 AM
I have always felt that Cams IS good for the BRF. It was a PR nightmare to get the public to accept her, which they have succeed in doing. Along the way, the RF has changed. They seemed to be in tuned with public opinion and more willing to adapt. It started with the days following Diana's death and accelerated during this PR campaign.
Charles is IMO a happy man. He seems more content and settled. I feel that Cams is behind that. And a happy man is going to be more willing to take on Kingship than the reluctant sullen and unhappy man from 30 - 40 years ago.
Cams is always going to be a hard sell with many people. Diana still is warm in many hearts. But the past happened, it can not be changed. If the RF has accepted Cams, I am willing to give her a chance. Afterall, they know her much better than any of us.
Well the real 64000.00 dollar question is have they really accepted her? Lets face it they have to show happy families they did this while Diana and Sarah were in the family having marital problems they never really do let their feelings be known only Princess Anne is capable of telling it like it really is. Camilla was unacceptable before Diana came into the picture and was unsuitable so all of a sudden 40+ years later that has changed?
What happened between them all back then was terribly complicated....and made all the worse because so much of it was played out in the public eye. I admit I don't know or understand all the circumstances and minutiae. The POW and DOC have my full support and I admire them both (she is my favorite royal), but I'm not getting on the polarizing bandwagon. And I do know that we are ALL deserving of forgiveness.
I didn't read Di's book or Chuck's response to it because personally I am disgusted by " The War of Wales" they were both very angry at each other and loved to throw blame at each other ... both books are not reliable because they reflect two angry people who would have said anything to hurt each other ... having said that ... Chuck never had a sit down like Di with his biographer he just let his biographer do his thing and he found letters one of which was of Phil pressuring his son to marry Di ... but I could be wrong as I said I want no part in that mess ...
Quote from: sandy on July 05, 2014, 12:22:51 AM
What turned me off is (and I agree with Trudie's post) was that Camilla apparently thought she did nothing wrong and was ready to walk into Diana's Memorial Service until stopped by public opinion.
Camilla had originally decided not to go to the memorial. She was asked to reconsider by William and Harry. They wanted her there. When she said yes, public opinion turned against her, and she stayed home.
Cindy
^ Yep Will and Harry invited her so obviously THEY saw nothing wrong with it !!!
Quote from: cinrit on July 04, 2014, 05:50:14 PM
Did Charles say he "was forced" to marry Diana, or did he say he "felt pressured" to marry her? It's tempting to assume Charles was the first to stray in 1986, but to be fair, we simply do not know. The four people involved probably don't even know.
Cindy
there was a lot of pressure but in a general way. He was 30plus, it was time he got married. If he waited much longer, his chances of finding a suitable virgin were getting slimmer and there would be a bigger age gap between him and his wife. The public liked Diana, the RF liked her, she seemed perfect, she was in love with Charles.. the only person who was unsure was Charles...
Did the Princes invite Camilla for her own sake though, or because such an invitation would really please their father? We don't know what William and Harry really think of Camilla in their hearts. If they completely absolve her of any blame in the break-up of their parents' marriage they have a larger capacity for forgiveness than most people possess.
William and Harry were grown ups when Charles married Camilla. They did not live with them and had their own quarters and did spend time at schools and military academies. She had no part of raising them. How they feel is subject to speculation. I think their father is high maintenance and I really don't think they had much of a choice regarding accepting Camilla. But that said I doubt it is a big lovefest with her.
Quote from: Eri on July 05, 2014, 08:34:47 AM
I didn't read Di's book or Chuck's response to it because personally I am disgusted by " The War of Wales" they were both very angry at each other and loved to throw blame at each other ... both books are not reliable because they reflect two angry people who would have said anything to hurt each other ... having said that ... Chuck never had a sit down like Di with his biographer he just let his biographer do his thing and he found letters one of which was of Phil pressuring his son to marry Di ... but I could be wrong as I said I want no part in that mess ...
Dimbleby did speak to Charles and his friends. He did not just base his research on letters. Philip's letter did not tell Charles he "had to" marry Diana. It said that if he didn't want to marry her he needed to let her go. Charles was 32 not a baby and made his own choices. It's amazing how the grown man blamed others for his own choices.
Diana never had a "sit down" with Morton. She sent tapes that answered questions he sent to her via a go-between. Her friends like Charles friends cooperated with Dimbleby cooperated with Morton.
I think both books are reliable and are of course from the people directly involved.
Double post auto-merged: July 05, 2014, 02:19:40 PM
Quote from: amabel on July 05, 2014, 01:54:21 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 04, 2014, 05:50:14 PM
Did Charles say he "was forced" to marry Diana, or did he say he "felt pressured" to marry her? It's tempting to assume Charles was the first to stray in 1986, but to be fair, we simply do not know. The four people involved probably don't even know.
Cindy
there was a lot of pressure but in a general way. He was 30plus, it was time he got married. If he waited much longer, his chances of finding a suitable virgin were getting slimmer and there would be a bigger age gap between him and his wife. The public liked Diana, the RF liked her, she seemed perfect, she was in love with Charles.. the only person who was unsure was Charles...
Technically Charles did not have to get married. IMO he did not want to have Andrew and his children succeed him. I think he very much wanted his own flesh and blood heirs. If Charles knew he preferred another woman he could have not married at all or put everything out on the table with the suitable woman before he proposed. She may have accepted the proposal because she'd be set for life and agree to be "civilized" about Camilla. He had no business marrying a starry eyed girl obviously besotted with him. . I think he felt of marriage as a "concept" and did not think of the realities of how human beings behaved and thought.
Double post auto-merged: July 05, 2014, 02:21:54 PM
Quote from: Eri on July 05, 2014, 01:20:18 PM
^ Yep Will and Harry invited her so obviously THEY saw nothing wrong with it !!!
Eri you don't know the circumstances of why they invited her. I think their dad "suggested" they do it --I notice before the service he had to look at Harry's speech. I think Charles was clueless enough to think it a good idea and I think she'd like to send the message that see they all moved on and played the one big happy family. She could have thanked them (or Charles more likely) and turned down the invite. She took a lot of attention away from it with her dithering about backing out which she should have done in the first place.
Double post auto-merged: July 05, 2014, 02:24:01 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 05, 2014, 11:06:23 AM
Quote from: sandy on July 05, 2014, 12:22:51 AM
What turned me off is (and I agree with Trudie's post) was that Camilla apparently thought she did nothing wrong and was ready to walk into Diana's Memorial Service until stopped by public opinion.
Camilla had originally decided not to go to the memorial. She was asked to reconsider by William and Harry. They wanted her there. When she said yes, public opinion turned against her, and she stayed home.
Cindy
Cindy this is all hearsay. William and Harry never said anything publicly about Camilla and the invite. They wisely did not issue statements or spoke to the press about it. I think it was Charles' idea I don't think William and Harry are that cold blooded to watch the woman that hurt their mother pay "her respects." (LOL)
I never read Camilla did not want to go and would not accept. I think the Queen had to step in and wise up her clueless son and his wife. And the outcry was so much that Camilla at the last minute backed out.
Double post auto-merged: July 05, 2014, 02:28:36 PM
Quote from: Princess Cassandra on July 05, 2014, 02:19:10 AM
What happened between them all back then was terribly complicated....and made all the worse because so much of it was played out in the public eye. I admit I don't know or understand all the circumstances and minutiae. The POW and DOC have my full support and I admire them both (she is my favorite royal), but I'm not getting on the polarizing bandwagon. And I do know that we are ALL deserving of forgiveness.
It was not complicated. Charles felt entitled to have mistresses and had two married mistresses: Kanga and Camilla. Camilla became the favorite and Kanga was "out. Camilla liked IMO the perks and privileges of being the mistress and would have had a lot to lose had Charles and Diana made a go of the marriage. I think Camilla worked very hard to undermine the marriage and went to the press (Stuart Higgins) to give her side. Diana was upset because Charles would not give up the "friendship" with Camilla and Diana felt like she was playing second fiddle to Camilla so to speak. Camilla even let Diana know who was boss by sending Charles presents on the honeymoon with Diana. It is not complicated: a selfish woman made sure her married lover's marriage would not work; she flattered the lover and put down his wife (something mistresses traditionally never did--Lily Langtry for example would not put down Princess of Wales, Alexandra). Charles was in the thrall of this woman and once he did his duty and got the heir and spare Diana was history. Sorry I don't see this as complicated. It's one of the oldest stories of a mistress usurping the wife's place.
Quote from: Curryong on July 05, 2014, 02:08:53 PM
Did the Princes invite Camilla for her own sake though, or because such an invitation would really please their father? We don't know what William and Harry really think of Camilla in their hearts. If they completely absolve her of any blame in the break-up of their parents' marriage they have a larger capacity for forgiveness than most people possess.
I should not think they completely absolve her, but I think that they are not interested in going over the past again and again, and have accepted her as stepmother and C's wife... I think they get on fairly well, they know she makes C happy and are happy for him, and they have their own lives to lead and aren't going to agonise all their lives over their parents bad marriage. I think that they could see as they got older that Charles and Di simply didn't have enough to make a good marriage and it was likely to fail and that when that happened, it was likely that both husband and wife would take other lovers.
Quote from: sandy on July 05, 2014, 02:14:33 PM
Diana never had a "sit down" with Morton. She sent tapes that answered questions he sent to her via a go-between. Her friends like Charles friends cooperated with Dimbleby cooperated with Morton.
That's true. Diana sneaked to get her story out, and then denied at first that she had anything to do with it. We didn't learn about the tapes that she provided to Morton until after her death.
QuoteTechnically Charles did not have to get married. IMO he did not want to have Andrew and his children succeed him. I think he very much wanted his own flesh and blood heirs.
It has always been the preference of the monarchy that the next heir be from the current heir. If it weren't so, Philip wouldn't have cared if Charles got married or not, and wouldn't have pressured him.
QuoteCindy this is all hearsay. William and Harry never said anything publicly about Camilla and the invite. They wisely did not issue statements or spoke to the press about it. I think it was Charles' idea I don't think William and Harry are that cold blooded to watch the woman that hurt their mother pay "her respects." (LOL)
It's
all hearsay. I believe the version I think makes the most sense, and you believe the version that you think makes the most sense. But I think Camilla, at her age, could have distinguished the difference between an invitation that was forced, and one that was sincere.
Cindy
I imagine that Will and Harry felt ti would be better if Camilla was there, from a PR point of view. But when there was a public outcry, tey were equally Ok with her not going.
Quote from: cinrit on July 05, 2014, 03:11:32 PM
I think Camilla, at her age, could have distinguished the difference between an invitation that was forced, and one that was sincere.
Cindy
I think Camilla was only interested on being accepted by the public and Charles's sons so, it was not not a matter of distinguishing but what would give her the best pr...
Well from my point of view Camilla is and always has been interested in Camilla. I don't believe she cared if she was accepted by Charles's sons though she knew that it would make things easier especially if she didn't step in to Mummy territory but played friend on the surface and made Papa extremely happy. Camilla has been great at her own PR with the original guidance of Bolland she put it out that she was hesitant to become a public figure nonsense she loves the glittering events and that started with her original charity work and the original first kiss photo with Charles at a charity reception line. Camilla never cared about charity work during her marriage to APB it was only after her divorce and Diana's death did she get involved in a cause knowing it would help with her reputation being somewhat restored.
Quote from: amabel on July 05, 2014, 03:39:32 PM
I imagine that Will and Harry felt ti would be better if Camilla was there, from a PR point of view. But when there was a public outcry, tey were equally Ok with her not going.
It would have been a PR disaster and hijacked the purpose of the event. I don't think William and Harry would have liked to see her "honoring" their mother. They are not hypocrites. I think Charles was pushing for her to be there.
Double post auto-merged: July 05, 2014, 07:35:07 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 05, 2014, 03:11:32 PM
Quote from: sandy on July 05, 2014, 02:14:33 PM
Diana never had a "sit down" with Morton. She sent tapes that answered questions he sent to her via a go-between. Her friends like Charles friends cooperated with Dimbleby cooperated with Morton.
That's true. Diana sneaked to get her story out, and then denied at first that she had anything to do with it. We didn't learn about the tapes that she provided to Morton until after her death.
QuoteTechnically Charles did not have to get married. IMO he did not want to have Andrew and his children succeed him. I think he very much wanted his own flesh and blood heirs.
It has always been the preference of the monarchy that the next heir be from the current heir. If it weren't so, Philip wouldn't have cared if Charles got married or not, and wouldn't have pressured him.
QuoteCindy this is all hearsay. William and Harry never said anything publicly about Camilla and the invite. They wisely did not issue statements or spoke to the press about it. I think it was Charles' idea I don't think William and Harry are that cold blooded to watch the woman that hurt their mother pay "her respects." (LOL)
It's all hearsay. I believe the version I think makes the most sense, and you believe the version that you think makes the most sense. But I think Camilla, at her age, could have distinguished the difference between an invitation that was forced, and one that was sincere.
Cindy
Diana wanted to get her story out. I don't blame her for not owning up. She would have perhaps paid dearly for it. In many ways it is a good thing she got her side out. Since she is slammed by Charles sympathizers and even his relatives.
It may be the preference of the monarchy but many second sons have become the King. It is not mandatory for the Prince of Wales to have a legitimate heir. That is what the line of succession is for.
I did not say the invitation was "forced." I think Charles "suggested" to his sons that she be invited. The sons would have had to be made of stone to think it "OK" for Camilla to "honor" their mother. I credit William and Harry with more sensitivity. Camilla's presence would have ruined the event.
Double post auto-merged: July 05, 2014, 07:38:49 PM
Quote from: amabel on July 05, 2014, 03:05:20 PM
Quote from: Curryong on July 05, 2014, 02:08:53 PM
Did the Princes invite Camilla for her own sake though, or because such an invitation would really please their father? We don't know what William and Harry really think of Camilla in their hearts. If they completely absolve her of any blame in the break-up of their parents' marriage they have a larger capacity for forgiveness than most people possess.
I should not think they completely absolve her, but I think that they are not interested in going over the past again and again, and have accepted her as stepmother and C's wife... I think they get on fairly well, they know she makes C happy and are happy for him, and they have their own lives to lead and aren't going to agonise all their lives over their parents bad marriage. I think that they could see as they got older that Charles and Di simply didn't have enough to make a good marriage and it was likely to fail and that when that happened, it was likely that both husband and wife would take other lovers.
Nobody knows what they think except them. I don't think they try to prettify it and give Camilla a pass.--they are cordial to her for their father's sake IMO.
Another woman was around in their parents marriage and she married their father. The other woman was also in the marriage from the get go. Charles and Diana did not have enough to make a marriage because hubby preferred another woman and did not drop her. I don't get all the hue and cry over making Charles happy. Who did he make "happy". Himself most likely. And Camilla made herself happy by latching on to him and did not want to give him up and also the lifestyle being with him gave her. If he had been Charles Jones--I doubt she'd have given him the time of day.
I would prefer to stick to FACTS. FACTS. Not my opinion ,yours, hers, his, theirs. I am going to try to bring it to the center and for peace around here.Much of waht we are debating AGAIN is irrelevant. M<any variables to explain this and that.
FACTS_________________________
PC and C were involved sometimes sexaully and sometimes not since they starting dating in the 1970's.
They have been on and off since they started dating....her marriage, pregnancy and childbirth, his other girlfriends, startlets( Susan Geroge etc.) , mistreses, etc. at that time.
They only way they were not going to be is if PC ever let her go or found a more formidable force as in a woman as strong and determined and as she was. PD was a fish out of water. Unmatched. Did not know how to go about PC and Cam.
Had no advice. Had no mother , really in the sense of the word, no she did not. No aunts.
PC and C undermined that mariage at every turn. Fred and Gladys went on the honeymoon for God's Sake!!!!
FACT- as the old people say...a man is not going to go any further than you let him. A woman is not going to go any further than you let her.
PC and were a couple from day one. C did not mind and wanted and did want PC ...to be there for him as advisor, lover, confidante, nurse (when he broke his arm or whatever) PD wanted to be there but was not wanted . Mama Camilla was there to make it all better.
The PD memorial. Maybe the PH and PW love her to bits and invited her to please their father and maybe the cunning
bas(*&s did so for they knew public would roar at that. The princes were young adults then. We NONE know. C going was simply appropriate. PC should not have gone either. Really.
Please, it would have looked as if she was dancing on the PD's grave.
Though with most of you here and the public today would would say she was trying to stomp the weeds off Poor PD 's grave, LOL!!!!
It was too RECENT then. That is the ONLY reason.
If PD had died last week, would ,could C attend the funeral? Maybe? Maybe not? I do not think they, PC, C, and PD would have not been friends. PD and PC would have had to sit side by side at the wedding, graduations, ...C and PD's husband/boyfriend would have been seated elsewhere.
Whether BRF , esp. PP and QEII, and the princes love her, adore, is IRRELEVANT.
PC wanted to marry her and did. They ALL MUST as the people MUST give her respect as the Q to be.
The Princes cannot and never will express their true reasons whatever they are and I do not care if they love or dispise her. It is really irrelevant. Many varibales here. They are men. They have their own lives. Their mother is dead and not coming back. They were a pre-teen and teenager when their mother died. PC had to spend time with them along the TTB and QEII and PP . Add boarding school. When they did meet her, PW first the saying goes, they were young adults.
I assume, I ASSUME they tolerate her, cordial, untied front for their subjects is a must, and she keeps boundaries with them. Ex. no advice on school, duties, choosing a girlfriend/wife, etc. They have QEII for that.
Parents and kids, weird relationship with many unless they seek help or can separate and many do and many dont' and I am speaking of unhealthy ones or where wrong was .
Ex. OJ Simpson(Nicole's kids by him) children still visit him in jail. They do not believe by 100% that he killed their mother.
They have visited and stayed somehwat in touch with NS 's family, but the subjects of their father by Browns is NEVER broight up. That is how they all have lived these years.
So my point, PH and PW KNOW what happened and KNOW C and know their father. ONLYtheir closest friends and K know , really know and the public will never know.
Who can be a good reason for change, the BRF for the better and should be , GOD a statue should be made of her? PD. She came. Worked. Bred. And the ultimate , unexpected, pleasant surprise ,a gift for PC and C, was getting herself killed. Who can ask of anything more? LOL
I say this to say about C being Queen of Hearts by her subjects...and how you here all forgive, she her as a sweet ,old wronged lady, etc. well, there are many variables for her rise in opinion.
1-PD is dead. Not popping up in the press everyday or out there living. 2- Time. Time moves on. 3- Cam is not open by the BRF, TPTB, and her subjects for vote. I mean PC even marrying her, not a thing anyone could do . Not even QEII IF , IF she even wanted to. 4-It is what it is.
She/he who lives has the last the say. QE the Q Mother ...did not want... well, she died at long last and HAHA, WQueen Camilla lives in Clearnce House as her city palace.
QEII will die one day. a long timem from now. If PC dies before he becomes K, we can really see how much the Princes adore Cam. If Cam dies before she is Q, then you can make an opinion too.
PC ,no doubt wanted to marry PD.Perfect girl of the nobility and one who agreeed.
YES, he wanted his heirs. Of course. He is heir and wanted his line to coninue.
We have debated this over and over.
it is what it is.
To me, though I do not live under her rule, Camilla WILL ALWAYS be The Rotweiller.
She and PC represent to me, people who have done wronged and are rewarded in abundance by fate (PD dying) , even God for their wrong doing.
Camilla will be Queen. 53% may approve. Doesn't mean I have to like it or approve.
I have a huge problem with C&C and how they undermined a marriage from the very beginning.
To me, it's like when something bad happens. I accept it, but I don't like it.
A lot of children see their parents marry their lovers nothing particular happens Will and Harry are not a special case ... frankly given that she and Chuck ( especially for Harry) are the only family they got I don't see why wish or project they dislike her ...
William and Harry want their father to be happy just as much as they wanted their mother to be happy.
Cindy
William doesn't like her and does not hide it, in public, it is Harry who has taken it upon himself to make her, as with Kate, to make her feel welcome. I think there is a reason she needed a hard drink after meeting William but not after meeting Harry.
Quote from: Rebound on July 06, 2014, 02:19:04 AM
Camilla will be Queen. 53% may approve. Doesn't mean I have to like it or approve.
I have a huge problem with C&C and how they undermined a marriage from the very beginning.
To me, it's like when something bad happens. I accept it, but I don't like it.
But they didn't "undermine a marriage". Charles would have preferred is marriage to work, if only because he knew what disaster It would be if it didn't work.
Double post auto-merged: July 06, 2014, 12:38:55 PM
Quote from: Limabeany on July 06, 2014, 12:26:57 PM
William doesn't like her and does not hide it, in public, it is Harry who has taken it upon himself to make her, as with Kate, to make her feel welcome. I think there is a reason she needed a hard drink after meeting William but not after meeting Harry.
how do you deduce that? I can't see any signs of any great emotion on Will's part over anything. I am sure he would not wish his father to be unhappy so he's prepared to get on with Cam. She shares the RF's interests in country things, just as he does and probably she was the right person for C to marry, so Im sure that over time, he's gotten over the trauma of his mother's death and her unhappiness and gets on Ok with Camilla.
He didn't want his marriage to work, he wanted Diana to accept Camilla as his mistress, that is not wanting a marriage to work, that is wanting a modern woman to play medieval damsel for you so you can have the life and woman you want in your bed, while presenting a public façade...
If William doesn't like Camilla (and there's no reason for me to believe he doesn't), he hides it very well in public:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/07/article-2140596-0247CE26000004B0-131_634x449.jpg
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/04/19/world/europe/CAMILLA/CAMILLA-popup.jpg
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/04/04/article-2303888-144B47D8000005DC-189_634x385.jpg
http://s2.firstpost.in/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/1Camilla_Kate_William_Reuters.jpg
http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/bg/Prince+William+Camilla+Parker+Bowles+Trooping+ZKJNTYktHg_l.jpg
Cindy
He does what he needs to do in public, but he is rarely close to her... I don't think he is as good at forgiving or pretending to forgive as Harry...
Quote from: Limabeany on July 06, 2014, 12:40:32 PM
He didn't want his marriage to work, he wanted Diana to accept Camilla as his mistress, that is not wanting a marriage to work, that is wanting a modern woman to play medieval damsel for you so you can have the life and woman you want in your bed, while presenting a public façade...
that's Diana's story. it does not follow that it is the truth,.
Double post auto-merged: July 06, 2014, 12:49:48 PM
Quote from: Limabeany on July 06, 2014, 12:41:28 PM
He does what he needs to do in public, but he is rarely close to her... I don't think he is as good at forgiving or pretending to forgive as Harry...
I don't see any great difference, in his attitude to Cam and Harry's. I'd say both of them wished that their parents marriage had worked, but they have long long ago realised that it did not work, and that it was almost inevitable that both parties would either take other lovers or divorce.
Quote from: Limabeany on July 06, 2014, 12:41:28 PM
He does what he needs to do in public, but he is rarely close to her... I don't think he is as good at forgiving or pretending to forgive as Harry...
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you said he doesn't hide it. As for Harry, considering the looks he gives the media sometimes, I'm not so sure he's very good at hiding much, either.
Cindy
I'd say of the 2 of them harry's more oepen. Will is more guarded.
True. Different personalities. I doubt it has anything to do with Camilla, specifically.
Cindy
As usual a lot of projecting and wishful thinking going on here ...
Quote from: Eri on July 05, 2014, 08:34:47 AM
I didn't read Di's book or Chuck's response to it because personally I am disgusted by " The War of Wales" they were both very angry at each other and loved to throw blame at each other ... both books are not reliable because they reflect two angry people who would have said anything to hurt each other ... having said that ... Chuck never had a sit down like Di with his biographer he just let his biographer do his thing and he found letters one of which was of Phil pressuring his son to marry Di ... but I could be wrong as I said I want no part in that mess ...
Good points. I admit I read the Morton book but that was years Go she. I still believe everything Diana said was the truth. Both Charles and Diana should have kept their mouths shut; I feel they opened a door that refuses to be closed she it comes to the BRF and celebs as a whole, the idea that their private lives are fair game for out entertainment.
One reason I admire Camilla is that with all the negativity thrown at her she never responded to it. IMO that shows strength of character.
Double post auto-merged: July 06, 2014, 05:12:20 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 05, 2014, 11:06:23 AM
Quote from: sandy on July 05, 2014, 12:22:51 AM
What turned me off is (and I agree with Trudie's post) was that Camilla apparently thought she did nothing wrong and was ready to walk into Diana's Memorial Service until stopped by public opinion.
Camilla had originally decided not to go to the memorial. She was asked to reconsider by William and Harry. They wanted her there. When she said yes, public opinion turned against her, and she stayed home.
Cindy
If that's true then once again the public overrules what William and Henry want just like it did back in 1997.
K Montague. Strength of character in Camilla would have meant that she stopped contacting or seeing Charles or taking his calls once he married Diana. I don't see any strength of character in the woman. Camilla had a powerful man protecting her and a spin doctor promoting her. Diana OTOH was just tossed aside like yesterday's trash by Charles and IMO was the vulnerable one. And her memory is still trashed by Charles pals and relatives
We don't know what the boys "wanted: re: Camilla's attendance at the memorial service. They had a needy father who probably urged them. They would have had to be very hard hearted to see Camilla ruin the service. And Camilla and Charles showed poor judgment considering if she went there all the years of PR would have taken a huge hit and she would have been vilified.
Quote from: Eri on July 06, 2014, 01:56:14 PM
As usual a lot of projecting and wishful thinking going on here ...
On both sides Eri.
Double post auto-merged: July 06, 2014, 07:00:56 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 06, 2014, 01:25:46 PM
True. Different personalities. I doubt it has anything to do with Camilla, specifically.
Cindy
Of course it does. Another woman around always hurts a marriage. Camilla is the elephant in the room that some want to ignore.
Double post auto-merged: July 06, 2014, 07:02:41 PM
Quote from: amabel on July 06, 2014, 12:48:30 PM
Quote from: Limabeany on July 06, 2014, 12:40:32 PM
He didn't want his marriage to work, he wanted Diana to accept Camilla as his mistress, that is not wanting a marriage to work, that is wanting a modern woman to play medieval damsel for you so you can have the life and woman you want in your bed, while presenting a public façade...
that's Diana's story. it does not follow that it is the truth,.
Double post auto-merged: July 06, 2014, 12:49:48 PM
Quote from: Limabeany on July 06, 2014, 12:41:28 PM
He does what he needs to do in public, but he is rarely close to her... I don't think he is as good at forgiving or pretending to forgive as Harry...
I don't see any great difference, in his attitude to Cam and Harry's. I'd say both of them wished that their parents marriage had worked, but they have long long ago realised that it did not work, and that it was almost inevitable that both parties would either take other lovers or divorce.
Actions can speak louder than words. It is a fact that Charles took Diana to the PBs when they were dating. She spent weekends. I do think Charles wanted them to be "civilized" and the young lady Diana would see Camilla as a "friend" and like APB understand when Camilla and Charles spend"quality" time together.
Double post auto-merged: July 06, 2014, 07:04:05 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 06, 2014, 12:40:43 PM
If William doesn't like Camilla (and there's no reason for me to believe he doesn't), he hides it very well in public:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/07/article-2140596-0247CE26000004B0-131_634x449.jpg
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/04/19/world/europe/CAMILLA/CAMILLA-popup.jpg
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/04/04/article-2303888-144B47D8000005DC-189_634x385.jpg
http://s2.firstpost.in/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/1Camilla_Kate_William_Reuters.jpg
http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/bg/Prince+William+Camilla+Parker+Bowles+Trooping+ZKJNTYktHg_l.jpg
Cindy
The royals are good at keeping up appearances. Even in the days of turmoil in their marriage people were fooled by Charles and Diana when they were in public (they even danced together and looked happy with each other). William is not going to be nasty to Camilla--he has a needy father and would not rock the boat.
Quote from: sandy on July 06, 2014, 06:55:47 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 06, 2014, 01:25:46 PM
True. Different personalities. I doubt it has anything to do with Camilla, specifically.
Of course it does. Another woman around always hurts a marriage. Camilla is the elephant in the room that some want to ignore.
That's not what I meant. I was responding to a post about the different personalities of William and Harry, and added that Camilla has nothing to do with that ... since this thread is about her, after all.
Quote from: cinrit on July 06, 2014, 12:40:43 PM
If William doesn't like Camilla (and there's no reason for me to believe he doesn't), he hides it very well in public:
Quote from: sandyThe royals are good at keeping up appearances. Even in the days of turmoil in their marriage people were fooled by Charles and Diana when they were in public (they even danced together and looked happy with each other). William is not going to be nasty to Camilla--he has a needy father and would not rock the boat.
Again, I was responding to a post that claimed William does not hide his dislike for Camilla. But is it at all possible that William loves his father every bit as much as he loved his mother, and wants him to be happy, and realizes that he finally is?
Cindy
Many of you ignore facts FACTS and project your own feelings and emotions on it all. Take out the emotions.
Pardon me for borrowing some of your pints tossed around.
FACTS- It was a bad marriage and doomed BECAUSE PC never gave up C and C never wanted to be given up. PC and PD had tons of things in common. That line of nothing in common is just an old line is just an old line.
APB accepted his wife with PC as APB had his affairs.
PD was a modern woman and did not want. She was also a woman of the nobility and could have made it work by finding her own Lord/Duke and she and PC be together in public. Behind palace walls, a whole 'nother story. THIS is how life is for some people and some people in their world.
YES, both princes wanted their parents to be happy and both princes loved both their parents. FACT-Cammilla caused their mother so much heartache. FACT- their father also kept Cammila there as his pusedo wife.
FACT- we none know how they feel towards her. FACT -the pictures you posted NOTHING. In public there is a united front.
The only way the public can make a good call on how they feel is if she,DofCorn, dies after PC dies. If he dies as K and she, Q Dowager , whatever, then you can see.
My hunch, there will not be DofCorn in their lives as a "so-called mother fiugre." ALL truth then PC as P or K will be dead.
Then is , if he dies as K, Queen Camilla will be allowed to live in Clearnace House , I am sure. They can take the jewels, don't have her at court for King Willim, but still, Queen CAMILLA , the Dowager whatever it is called WINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Protocl and respect DEMANDS that she gets that and this and that.
Though, realistically, by the time K Charles and Q Cammilla
die , they will both be well into their 80's.
FACT- the princes were effected by their parents AND Camilla.
WHY? PROOF! PW isthisclose to the Mids, Mom and Dad. He thrives on that and married a family girl as in one who knows, uderstands family. PW never had a familly.
PH,I predict, will marry a family girl as in one who knows and believes in family. CBonas was from a broken home and her sibs were , have different daddys Her mom had a lot of baby's daddy's and marriages. GEESCH!!!!!!
To the thread, it doesnot amtter if won her subjects hearts or not.
It is waht it is, Queen Camila to be and no one , not even QEII could do a thing about it.
My advice to you all who think she is grand. Digniifed. Unlike PD, who blamed and blabbed all over, while Cammila never uttered a word, OH PLEASE!!!!!!!
Well, girls if you see a man you want or old boyfriend, go for it. Be da98ned the wife and children.
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on July 06, 2014, 10:51:07 PM
FACT -the pictures you posted NOTHING. In public there is a united front.
Unfortunately, you also missed the point of my posting the pictures of William and Camilla. I did not post them to prove how close they are. I posted them in response to a post that claimed William dislikes Camilla
and doesn't try to hide it. From those photos I posted, if he does dislike Camilla (and I'm not saying he does), he is very obviously hiding his dislike.
Cindy
What else is he meant to do? Her husband is paying for his wife, child and many homes. William knows where his bread is buttered.
FDF-IMO Charles and Diana did not have much in common except for their love for their two sons. Their music tastes, friends, interests, education and real life experiences were very different IMO.
What do you believe were interests that they shared?
TLK Charles knowing that Camila was "there for him" I think put a damper on his working on his marriage to Diana. Diana did like classical music--ballet has classical music, Diana played classical music on the piano, and liked opera (though she did not like Wagner). Diana and Charles also liked skiing (Camilla does not go on ski trips BTW). Many husband and wives have different interests. having the "same" interests is not an indicator of a solid marriage. It's love, empathy and the two working on the marriage. I don't think Charles worked very hard on his marriage knowing another woman was there for him.
Quote from: cinrit on July 06, 2014, 07:35:21 PM
Quote from: sandy on July 06, 2014, 06:55:47 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 06, 2014, 01:25:46 PM
True. Different personalities. I doubt it has anything to do with Camilla, specifically.
Of course it does. Another woman around always hurts a marriage. Camilla is the elephant in the room that some want to ignore.
That's not what I meant. I was responding to a post about the different personalities of William and Harry, and added that Camilla has nothing to do with that ... since this thread is about her, after all.
Quote from: cinrit on July 06, 2014, 12:40:43 PM
If William doesn't like Camilla (and there's no reason for me to believe he doesn't), he hides it very well in public:
Quote from: sandyThe royals are good at keeping up appearances. Even in the days of turmoil in their marriage people were fooled by Charles and Diana when they were in public (they even danced together and looked happy with each other). William is not going to be nasty to Camilla--he has a needy father and would not rock the boat.
Again, I was responding to a post that claimed William does not hide his dislike for Camilla. But is it at all possible that William loves his father every bit as much as he loved his mother, and wants him to be happy, and realizes that he finally is?
Cindy
Nobody knows how "happy" Charles is. I hope Charles wants other people to be happy too. I don't think it is a love fest with William and Camilla. I think he prefers Kate's parents to Camilla
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 12:05:44 AM
Quote from: SophieChloe on July 06, 2014, 11:30:47 PM
What else is he meant to do? Her husband is paying for his wife, child and many homes. William knows where his bread is buttered.
I agree. And William would probably lose the perks if he got snippy with his stepmother or talked back to his father. His father bent over backwards to help William achieve his dream of being normal.
Quote from: SophieChloe on July 06, 2014, 11:30:47 PM
What else is he meant to do? Her husband is paying for his wife, child and many homes. William knows where his bread is buttered.
Why is it so hard to believe that William loves Charles simply because he is his father?
Cindy
It's not hard to believe, Cindy. But easier to believe he tolerates Camilla because his Dad is paying for him, his wife and child. Which we keep being reminded of.
^ Of course William loves his father and to his credit Charles is a very good loving father. That said however I really don't believe that William would risk alienating his father if he really does dislike Camilla he would place nice with her for the sake of the father he loves. That said No one knows really how William or Harry really feels sure Harry did the love her to bits piece for an interview again who knows I doubt Harry would show his real feeling and risk alienating the father he loves. But Sophiechloe is also right William also knows where is bread is buttered and not playing nice to Camilla may just be to his peril. Look how well that worked out for William and Harry's mother.
Quote from: SophieChloe on July 07, 2014, 12:31:39 AM
It's not hard to believe, Cindy. But easier to believe he tolerates Camilla because his Dad is paying for him, his wife and child. Which we keep being reminded of.
I suppose both Charles' sons are hypocrites, then, since he pays for all four. Harry even went overboard in an interview and said, about Camilla, that they "love her to bits".
Cindy
It was tasteless and insensitive to publish this on the day of Diana's birthday -
I also think that all three of them - Charles Diana and Camilla lived rather carelessly - as if what they did might not have consequences. The whole thing was horrendous. The divorce was public and nasty and of course ends with the death of Diana. I do not feel sorry for Camilla nor do I admire her. She made her choices and they were never choices and those choices were never going to have an easy happy ending. Behavior has consequences. But I do not wish her any harm nor do I discount that she seems quite personable.
Charles is likely to be King - Camilla is likely to be Queen Consort. I hope that if Diana had lived she would have made her peace with Charles, Camilla and inside herself. I think she had become so disenchanted with the RF that she did not want to be Queen - she wanted only to be the mother of the King. As for Harry and Will - who knows - they have a complicated situation - they live with Charles and Camilla - Diana they have only memories of. I would think that supporting their father - especially for Harry - would be the important thing for them.
I guess some people just do not like the idea that Camilla appears to be a "winner". I can understand that but this is how it is.
I will never see Camilla as "personable." I see her as a manipulative woman who got what she wanted. Charles did start the downward spiral by thinking it "OK" to sleep with married women (Kanga and Camilla). He came into the marriage to Diana knowing he preferred another woman and married IMO Diana to get heirs. All of this was wrong. It is more than living "carelessly" it started by Charles wanting it all and being too selfish to think of Diana except as a broodmare.
Camilla was undermining Diana from the get go. I doubt Diana would have made peace with Camilla. Ever.
Cindy,Harry spoke up for his mother on his 18th birthday and at various other times and from the heart not just some throwaway line like "love her to bits". I think he tried to please his dad by making that comment about Camilla. "love her to bits" sounds like a throwaway line. I think Dad may have suggested that Harry speak up for Camilla. I think his Dad is high maintenance and the boys don't want to cross him. Charles is loved by his sons but parents can be high maintenance too.
No way will Harry and William ever make public disparaging remarks about Camilla and none of us can mind read to know what they really feel.
Quote from: TLLK on July 06, 2014, 11:43:02 PM
FDF-IMO Charles and Diana did not have much in common except for their love for their two sons. Their music tastes, friends, interests, education and real life experiences were very different IMO.
What do you believe were interests that they shared?
In common, and I have said sometimers in post they had NOTHING inn common.
Actually, they did have in common: two kids and could have had another son or daughter because she def would have, if things were different gone for a third pregnancy so it has been said by thosein the know.
Love of the Arts- She studied piano as all good girls of her rank and file should at least know one musical instrument.
Rank and file of the nobility-Both patriots of their country and were of the nobility/aristos world and knew it well.
Love of the Arts- she studied ballet as a girl adn did well, enjoyed it.
Love of Arts-attending plays.
Work and Duties of BRF-They both wporked and put work and their duties before their dislike for each even in the bitter , final end.
BRF ceremonial things-Ascot, Troooping , etc.
The Beauty and The Brains- well, it could have a real superpower couple. She reeling them in and he taking over after that. See Pres. JFK and JBK-Jack and Jackie.JBKO was formaly educated and spoke seeral languages though.
Love-She lovedloved him. Wanted him to love her. When he broke his arm or whatever, it was said she wanted him and he , well, Mamma Camilla was to tend to her man.
Polo-the game of the nobility/arisots. No, she did not play or went riding even, but she went to Polo games to support him early on.
Conutry and city life-Highgrove wa scoun try life. Where she grew up was country life. KP was their city home. They had both places but none for 12 months a year.
Friends/entertainers- if you want to say friends ok, but not really freinds. More of . Elton John for exa,mple is very close , freinds with PC andCammila NOW too. He could have been nin the entertainment friends/socially speaking acquantice circle for them for things like PC Trust. So really, these kind of people were not really friends-friends .
Some history-She met him when she was really young when he dated her sister and she played with PAndrew.
History-Her birthplace was QEII's estate ..something like that.
Sports-Swimmer-She was on school swim team.
Sports-love of skiing in Swiss, skiing
And this is all we know.
They had somethings, somethings at least to start from, to grow from. It was not totally a mismatch, nothing in common.
I have posted that they had NOTHING in common as well.
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 03:48:19 AM
Just some points to echo what some of you said....
cinritCindy, I did not misread , misunderstand your post. I will not list the pics BUT THERE IS NOT ONE, ONE single photo in PW AND PH AND K are NOT all happy,smily with PCamilla in the picture.
PH and PW WILL NOT, and have not ,and WILL NEVER SAY said anything negative about PCamila in public ESP while QEII is living and PC is living. Then when QEII dies, King C and Queen C will be and THEY WILL NEVER go against in public with any happy looks.
Theirs is a united front.
NOW if PCHar should die before QEII dies... we might see some different things.
YES, H and W love their father. Nicole Simpson kids love OJ and KNOW he did not kill their mother. We ll know he and he knows he did, but do not believe that.
The Donald Trump children by Ivanna love their sister by MarlaMaples and supported their dad, loved him, was happy as young children as they could be when he AND Marla cheated Ivanna and BOTH publically ridicued Ivanna to the press. It was ugly and even the )(*(e said awful things about the Mrs. esp. when she confronted the Mrs. on the Colorado slpopes.
Thre children were young like H and W but kids still love their parents and accpet as much as they can , at least on the surface and esp when that parents is in control, money, power. NO, Ivana NEVER had her choose. PD did not make her kids choose when she was a live; her or their dad.
That maraige ended and the half sister moved with her mother to CA. They get along with the new wife adn all three kids by Ivanna are leading , working with their father in his empire.
YES, many regular folks who are wronged by the spouse really take that anger and hurt on the kids and pit them against the other parent. Worst thing to do. Some regular kids side with one over the other of the own choosing as well.
To sandy, others, YES, Fred C and Gladys C are very happy together. There is no doubt about that.
YES, Camila The Rotweiller is the WINNERRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! She won it ALLLLL: the throne, the titles, the jewels,palaces, castles , place in her country's history, and the love of her subjects for they like QEII and PP and all RBF MUST accept her. It is a done deal. When they married, it was done.
Her ancestor ,Alice Kreepel is onnthe other side and so proud of her Little girl. Camila restored rank and file and and all for her family name, and that of her desendants .
They lived with PC and Cam. Well, the princes then had boarding school. TPTB and QEII and PP were there to guide them. Teh house was a castle or palace with wings and staff.
I do not , my op, think it was breakfast and dinner with Daddy and Cammy and Cammy's kids. One big happy family. A Brady Bunch. His, hers=theirs.
Oh, now I do think and once again, H AND W will not, have not and will never say anything publically nor be anything but smiliy with Cam in public pictures and that is when QEII finally dies and K C and Q C reign, look for her kids to be at Balmoral , Sandringham, the Buck Balcony, etc.
Downsizing the BRf family, well, future Lady Lopes can take over duties and Mrs. TBP can do things as well as K and PH's wife.
The children of THE QUEEN are the BRF. Domyou really think Queen Camilla is going to levae her kids and not be with them at Balmoral Christamas, etc. I think not. She is the QUEEN and the QUEEN rules.
All that being said, PH adn PW HAD BETTER be smiliy face .What can they do? Nothing but be smiliy face when it comes to Cammla, Queen of England.
PC paying for K adn W ...yeah, he better be nice nice to the Daddy's second wife because SHE is NOT one you want to cross. I think it sae to say that.
NEWSLFASH, wifey runs the show. Ex. K and W. Cammila adn PC. Regular folks, when the daddy takes a second wife, first set of kids usually get shut out or have or worst , spilt with her kids be them his or not. WIFE rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
She won!
Winnnig her subjects hearts? yes, no,maybe? Some of them . Who really cares? It does not matter. It is irrelevant!!!!
While this is obviously all guesswork on our parts, I personally believe that Will and Harry get along fine with Camilla. In part because Camilla and Kate are reported to be fairly close, and I don't think there's any chance that would be the case if Will secretly disliked the woman and was just putting on a good face for public appearances.
I would think they both had some resentment towards Camilla (and their father, and probably Diana as well) when they were growing up with all that mess, but it sounds like after Diana's death Charles handled things well -- he introduced Camilla to them slowly, and didn't push them to accept her more quickly than they were ready for. I think that probably went a long way toward the boys accepting her.
It is only "reported" that kate and Camilla are "close." Kate has a family that she is close too and I doubt she is anywhere as "close" to Camilla as she is to her family. I think there was some spin going on and the "closeness" reports have not been reported since about two years ago. Camilla has her own family, two children and several grandchildren and she spends time with them at Raymill away from the royals. I think William and Harry are polite to Camilla but they did not grow up with her--she is no "Carol Brady" to them. They also were adults when their father married Camilla and did not live with the couple--they went to schools and military academies and have their own apartments in royal housings. They will never say anything bad about Camilla and only be polite and cordial to her. But close? I doubt it. As a matter of fact I believe William is a lot closer to the Middletons than Camilla. He spends a lot more time with them and even called Michael Middleton "dad." I doubt he would ever even think of calling Camilla "Mummy." Harry I think is also cordial to her but the man has his own life now. She is the woman who married their father and fortunately did not have any hand in raising them.
Harry was 12 when his mother died and a "tween" I doubt he would have any resentment towards his dead mother. Angry that she died perhaps but "resentful" I doubt it. I also doubt William harbors resentment. Why on earth would Diana's two boys resent her--they will never see her again. They mourn her and are sad she can't be with them anymore.
I do think they realize what Camilla did and the role she played and they are not going to be Lovey Dovey with her.
Charles is their father and they respected his wishes about marrying her and did this for his sake IMO.
Charles did not introduce them "slowly"--Diana was not dead one year before the William invites Camilla to tea stories came out. Harry and WIlliam also a little over a year attended the Highgrove party where Camilla attended (but not the Queen or Philip). I do think they had no choice but Charles should have given them more time--it was not as if he was in any hurry to marry Camilla to have more children. Also Charles did not make t heir mother non-negotiable. Charles cousin trashes Diana to the media; an elderly lady in waiting bashed Diana in 2002 on a documentary about the Queen's jubilee year; Penny Junor and Ingrid Seward wrote poison pen books about Diana. Seward and Junor adore Charles so I don't buy the excuse that Charles could do nothing about them. He made Camilla non-negotiable and should have done the same for Diana at least for his sons' sakes.
You don't know how "ready" the boys were to meet their future stepmother. I think it did cause some issues. William and Harry were devoted to their mother and all of a sudden after less than a year Charles not only introduced them but made it very public with all media outlets picking up the "tea" story. I think that perfectly dreadful.
I agree that Kate is closer to her own family than to Camilla. I didn't think I was suggesting otherwise. :hmm: But Kate and Camilla had what sounded like a very friendly lunch shortly before the wedding, and they are often pictured talking and laughing at events.
The resentment I mentioned was not about Diana's death, but about the very public fight between their parents. Lots of people connected to the Royal household have said that Diana used to tell the boys more than she perhaps should have about the issues between her and Charles, and both Charles and Diana were going to the press (directly or through surrogates) to tell their side of things. I would expect that Will and Harry did not particularly enjoy seeing their parents splash those issues all over the papers. That's why William chose not to invite either of his parents, instead inviting Tiggy Legge-Bourke, to speech day at Eton in 1997.
Obviously things changed when Diana died. But the boys are from all reports still quite close to their father. My opinion, for the very little it's worth, is that they are not constantly faking their feelings but are instead exactly what they seem to be -- close to their father, and happy to see him with a woman who makes him happy.
I think a lot of the "friendly" lunch was for PR purposes. The press appeared to have been tipped off. And Camilla put on quite the show talking in a loud voice giving Kate advice. It was "happy families" PR IMO. I think Kate has enough brains not to listen to advice given by Camilla. She has her own family for support and advice.
I don't think Kate and Camilla are close. But they are obviously going to be polite and cordial in public and at various family events. William and Kate spend a lot of time with her parents and I think they are more comfortable with them than they are with Camilla. Kate is not going to rock the boat and be snippy with Camilla--as another poster indicated her father in law is footing many of the bills.
Diana told Harry nothing about Camilla. He was too young. Diana did confide in William but was not the "monster mother" that Charles sympathizers want her to be. She told William things ahead of time that would happen and did stress to both of her sons that she and "Papa" loved each other but could not live together anymore. Charles OTOH told his autobiographer he felt "forced" to marry their mother. Not a word of love mentioned.
I still think Charles should have made his sons mother non-negotiable after she died. And not used William in Harry in the "happy families" spin about Camilla. Diana is accused by her detractors of "using her sons." But Charles using his sons to try to get the public "accept" Camilla in PR was very wrong.
I think it not commendable of William to invite Tiggy. I think he was cruel to his mother and I think it very wrong that he did this He behaved like a brat. He might for all you know deeply regret this and the guilt about it is with him to this day. He can't invite his mother anyplace anymore and probably would have moved heaven and earth to have had a do-over and invited his mother.
Of course they are close to their father. But this "making their father happy" is a bit much--why can't they think of who their father made happy or makes happy. It feeds into their father's narcissistic behavior--I don't think they had much of a choice re: Camilla.
Harry was said to have started drinking at age 13 at the party for Charles in 1998. I think it was very difficult for him and he was left by his father at Highgrove and had access to the liquor cabinets.
Charles loves his sons but I think he always put the mistress first.
Charles pals started deriding Diana to the press before the Morton book. And Diana feared the nasty stories would cause damage to the degree that she would lose custody of their sons. I blame Charles more for not putting Diana first and dropping the mistress.
Quote from: Canuck on July 07, 2014, 03:15:56 PM
While this is obviously all guesswork on our parts, I personally believe that Will and Harry get along fine with Camilla. In part because Camilla and Kate are reported to be fairly close, and I don't think there's any chance that would be the case if Will secretly disliked the woman and was just putting on a good face for public appearances.
I
don't know about Kate, but I think hat Will gets on well enough with a country hearty type like Camilla. He was always fond of Tiggy L Bourke, who has similar tastes, and I'm sure he's now over the pain of the break up of his parents marriage.
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 05:19:36 PM
Quote from: cate1949 on July 07, 2014, 12:56:06 AM
It was tasteless and insensitive to publish this on the day of Diana's birthday -
I also think that all three of them - Charles Diana and Camilla lived rather carelessly - as if what they did might not have consequences. The whole thing was horrendous. The divorce was public and nasty and of course ends with the death of Diana. I do not feel sorry for Camilla nor do I admire her. She made her choices and they were never choices and those choices were never going to have an easy happy ending. Behavior has consequences. But I do not wish her any harm nor do I discount that she seems quite personable.
Charles is likely to be King - Camilla is likely to be Queen Consort. I hope that if Diana had lived she would have made her peace with Charles, Camilla and inside herself. I think she had become so disenchanted with the RF that she did not want to be Queen - she wanted only to be the mother of the King. As for Harry and Will - who knows - they have a complicated situation - they live with Charles and Camilla - Diana they have only memories of. I would think that supporting their father - especially for Harry - would be the important thing for them.
No more complicated than any people who have a divorced father who has remarried. They don't live iwht Charles and Cam, and Diana is I'm sure very much alive to them and they still love her. They just are able to get on with Camilla as their father's wife.
William likes expensive island vacations. He does not strike me as a country type. He likes hunting but likes the pleasures outside the limits of Balmoral.
I think nobody really gets over a parent's death or their parents' breaking up.l
I don't think he's close to Camilla in the least. He spent a lot of time with Kate's family since they dated. He is more their type than Camilla's.
He loves his father so he accepted Camilla but I don't think he is lovey dovey with Camilla. I think he does have some loyalty to his mother's memory and is not going to get all close with Camilla.
I'm sure Will felt guilty after Diana's death about not inviting her to one of his last school events she could have attended, but that doesn't mean he was wrong to leave his parents out. I think it's pretty unfair to call that bratty when he was the kid and his parents were the ones waging public battles with one another without much regard for what it was likely to do to their kids.
I am in no way a Diana detractor -- I think she was a very admirable person -- but I am realistic about her role in things and don't think of her as a saint. I agree with those who think that Charles restarted things with Camilla before Diana cheated on him, and that she likely cheated only after finding out. I also agree with those who think Diana put more dirt in the press than Charles did, though both behaved pretty badly in that regard. And I do think Diana was incredibly nasty to Tiggy Legge-Bourke, who had done nothing to deserve it, including by publicly insinuating that she'd had an abortion and by insisting that she be left out of the boys' events because she was jealous of how close they were to Tiggy.
I think Will and Harry loved both their parents and that following Diana's death, Charles really stepped up to provide them with support and be as involved as possible in their lives. I think both of them genuinely love him and want the best for him, and that although they may not have been fans initially, they're now fine with him and Camilla being together.
As for Charles making Camilla happy, I think it's pretty clear he does. People can debate whether she deserved the public anger she received or not (my feeling: she did not behave well in carrying on an affair with Charles, but the level of vitriol she received was hugely out of proportion to her "crime", especially after Diana died and the public grief about that sort of got grafted onto everyone's feeling about Camilla). But if she didn't really love Charles I don't think she would have stuck it out through all the anger and viciousness from the press and public. She was with him for years where it seemed impossible he would ever be able to marry her or she would ever become Queen, so I don't think she was doing it with the expectation of those things down the road. I think she just loves him, and is happy they're now married to one another and able to just be together.
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 05:46:09 PM
As for Kate and Camilla, I have often seen photos of them animatedly talking or laughing at public events. I think if she was just being polite so as not to upset Charles, she would be doing just that: being polite and nothing more. What I've seen has convinced me that Kate does actually like Camilla. Your opinion may be different, of course.
Of course they talk animatedly but that does not indicate what goes on in both their heads and how they think. It is all speculation how exactly they feel about each other. Kate does have her own family for support and advice though I believe she is polite to Camilla.
You have an opinion about William on that day. I have mine. I think he was bratty and did not do this for 'noble purposes.' His parents despite divorcing adored William and felt the sun rose and set on him. I see him as an ingrate. These are his parents. And his father is still supporting him and Kate.
Tiggy was incredibly nasty to Diana deriding her parenting to the media and calling William and Harry 'her boys'. She had an incredible nerve. She is no saint in her feud with Diana.
I doubt the boys had much choice re: their Dad and Camilla. They are polite and cordial to her but she is not like a "mummy' to them.
Camilla and Charles helped themselves to happiness for years despite the fact they are married to others. I think Charles great love is himself and Camilla's great love is herself.
It was possible for Charles to marry her in the 1970s but he could not be bothered telling her to wait for him. Charles spent big bucks on her "rehabilitation" so he was not doing this to keep her as mistress. She undermined the first wife and got most of what she had. I don't care for her and the way she got where she is today. Charles also named her publicly so her father was furious with him and APB divorced Camilla. I think marriage was inevitable after that and Charles was going to do as he pleased anyway.
Quote from: sandy on July 07, 2014, 05:59:43 PM
You have an opinion about William on that day. I have mine. I think he was bratty and did not do this for 'noble purposes.' His parents despite divorcing adored William and felt the sun rose and set on him. I see him as an ingrate. These are his parents. And his father is still supporting him and Kate.
Of course you're entitled to your opinion. But *my* opinion is that that is awfully harsh on a kid who was 15 years old at the time, caught between two adults he loved who were behaving badly.
We'll if William was actin bratty he learned from two parents who were great at bein bratty. I believe this event at Eton was during the war of the Wales' and I don blame him one but for not wanting the two instigators at a special school day, everyone who be focused on Charles and his wanting to love in Camilla's pants and Diana getting personal "riding lessons" from James Hewitt.
Quote from: Canuck on July 07, 2014, 05:42:13 PM
I'm sure Will felt guilty after Diana's death about not inviting her to one of his last school events she could have attended, but that doesn't mean he was wrong to leave his parents out. I think it's pretty unfair to call that bratty when he was the kid and his parents were the ones waging public battles with one another without much regard for what it was likely to do to their kids.
I am in no way a Diana detractor -- I think she was a very admirable person -- but I am realistic about her role in things and don't think of her as a saint. I agree with those who think that Charles restarted things with Camilla before Diana cheated on him, and that she likely cheated only after finding out. I also agree with those who think Diana put more dirt in the press than Charles did, though both behaved pretty badly in that regard. And I do think Diana was incredibly nasty to Tiggy Legge-Bourke, who had done nothing to deserve it, including by publicly insinuating that she'd had an abortion and by insisting that she be left out of the boys' events because she was jealous of how close they were to Tiggy.
I think Will and Harry loved both their parents and that following Diana's death, Charles really stepped up to provide them with support and be as involved as possible in their lives. I think both of them genuinely love him and want the best for him, and that although they may not have been fans initially, they're now fine with him and Camilla being together.
As for Charles making Camilla happy, I think it's pretty clear he does. People can debate whether she deserved the public anger she received or not (my feeling: she did not behave well in carrying on an affair with Charles, but the level of vitriol she received was hugely out of proportion to her "crime", especially after Diana died and the public grief about that sort of got grafted onto everyone's feeling about Camilla). But if she didn't really love Charles I don't think she would have stuck it out through all the anger and viciousness from the press and public. She was with him for years where it seemed impossible he would ever be able to marry her or she would ever become Queen, so I don't think she was doing it with the expectation of those things down the road. I think she just loves him, and is happy they're now married to one another and able to just be together.
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 05:46:09 PM
As for Kate and Camilla, I have often seen photos of them animatedly talking or laughing at public events. I think if she was just being polite so as not to upset Charles, she would be doing just that: being polite and nothing more. What I've seen has convinced me that Kate does actually like Camilla. Your opinion may be different, of course.
:goodpost: Couldn't have said it better :notworthy: As you said. He was 15. We are all kids at that age. It is unfair to criticize someones adult character by extrapolating from their adolescent behaviour
Kate is an outsider as much as Camilla, she needs all the friends she can get.
Kate has a support system--she has her family. Camilla also has her own children and sister. Her sister is Charles interior decorator. I doubt Kate and Camilla are close. I think the two on the surface act all palsy walsy but I think they are not close.
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 10:50:30 PM
Quote from: Macrobug on July 07, 2014, 09:53:04 PM
Quote from: Canuck on July 07, 2014, 05:42:13 PM
I'm sure Will felt guilty after Diana's death about not inviting her to one of his last school events she could have attended, but that doesn't mean he was wrong to leave his parents out. I think it's pretty unfair to call that bratty when he was the kid and his parents were the ones waging public battles with one another without much regard for what it was likely to do to their kids.
I am in no way a Diana detractor -- I think she was a very admirable person -- but I am realistic about her role in things and don't think of her as a saint. I agree with those who think that Charles restarted things with Camilla before Diana cheated on him, and that she likely cheated only after finding out. I also agree with those who think Diana put more dirt in the press than Charles did, though both behaved pretty badly in that regard. And I do think Diana was incredibly nasty to Tiggy Legge-Bourke, who had done nothing to deserve it, including by publicly insinuating that she'd had an abortion and by insisting that she be left out of the boys' events because she was jealous of how close they were to Tiggy.
I think Will and Harry loved both their parents and that following Diana's death, Charles really stepped up to provide them with support and be as involved as possible in their lives. I think both of them genuinely love him and want the best for him, and that although they may not have been fans initially, they're now fine with him and Camilla being together.
As for Charles making Camilla happy, I think it's pretty clear he does. People can debate whether she deserved the public anger she received or not (my feeling: she did not behave well in carrying on an affair with Charles, but the level of vitriol she received was hugely out of proportion to her "crime", especially after Diana died and the public grief about that sort of got grafted onto everyone's feeling about Camilla). But if she didn't really love Charles I don't think she would have stuck it out through all the anger and viciousness from the press and public. She was with him for years where it seemed impossible he would ever be able to marry her or she would ever become Queen, so I don't think she was doing it with the expectation of those things down the road. I think she just loves him, and is happy they're now married to one another and able to just be together.
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 05:46:09 PM
As for Kate and Camilla, I have often seen photos of them animatedly talking or laughing at public events. I think if she was just being polite so as not to upset Charles, she would be doing just that: being polite and nothing more. What I've seen has convinced me that Kate does actually like Camilla. Your opinion may be different, of course.
:goodpost: Couldn't have said it better :notworthy: As you said. He was 15. We are all kids at that age. It is unfair to criticize someones adult character by extrapolating from their adolescent behaviour
Adults and children can behave badly. And WIll was at a rebellious stage. I do think there is some arrogance in William. Despite it all, he was well loved by his parents and really should not have snubbed them that way.
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 10:52:03 PM
Quote from: Canuck on July 07, 2014, 09:22:25 PM
Quote from: sandy on July 07, 2014, 05:59:43 PM
You have an opinion about William on that day. I have mine. I think he was bratty and did not do this for 'noble purposes.' His parents despite divorcing adored William and felt the sun rose and set on him. I see him as an ingrate. These are his parents. And his father is still supporting him and Kate.
Of course you're entitled to your opinion. But *my* opinion is that that is awfully harsh on a kid who was 15 years old at the time, caught between two adults he loved who were behaving badly.
William knew he was loved by his parents. They had no differences with him. In his circle, many of his peers experienced divorce of their parents.
Diana was very hurt by what he did. And used the lunch she packed to take Harry on a picnic.
I don't think children should punish parents that way.
For what it is worth at public events where they speak animatedly at each other and show smiles all around one has to remember that this is a very public royal family who have to lead by example it simply wouldn't do to show real feelings to the very people you represent at home and abroad. I remember during the so called war of the Wales Diana and the Queen Mother sharing a carriage at Ascot it was speculated at the time the Queen Mother was not enchanted with Diana but acted the part. When Sarah was undergoing bad press and rumour's about her marriage she and Andrew were aboard a ship ready to greet the Queen and Sarah was visibly nervous and the Queen gave her a kiss on the cheek well we all know how long it really has been since Sarah has been seen with the RF only her former husband. Whether Camilla is loved by the family no one really knows but has Camilla won hearts only to those who are IMO sycophants
Quote from: Macrobug on July 07, 2014, 09:53:04 PM
Quote from: Canuck on July 07, 2014, 05:42:13 PM
I'm sure Will felt guilty after Diana's death about not inviting her to one of his last school events she could have attended, but that doesn't mean he was wrong to leave his parents out. I think it's pretty unfair to call that bratty when he was the kid and his parents were the ones waging public battles with one another without much regard for what it was likely to do to their kids.
I am in no way a Diana detractor -- I think she was a very admirable person -- but I am realistic about her role in things and don't think of her as a saint. I agree with those who think that Charles restarted things with Camilla before Diana cheated on him, and that she likely cheated only after finding out. I also agree with those who think Diana put more dirt in the press than Charles did, though both behaved pretty badly in that regard. And I do think Diana was incredibly nasty to Tiggy Legge-Bourke, who had done nothing to deserve it, including by publicly insinuating that she'd had an abortion and by insisting that she be left out of the boys' events because she was jealous of how close they were to Tiggy.
I think Will and Harry loved both their parents and that following Diana's death, Charles really stepped up to provide them with support and be as involved as possible in their lives. I think both of them genuinely love him and want the best for him, and that although they may not have been fans initially, they're now fine with him and Camilla being together.
As for Charles making Camilla happy, I think it's pretty clear he does. People can debate whether she deserved the public anger she received or not (my feeling: she did not behave well in carrying on an affair with Charles, but the level of vitriol she received was hugely out of proportion to her "crime", especially after Diana died and the public grief about that sort of got grafted onto everyone's feeling about Camilla). But if she didn't really love Charles I don't think she would have stuck it out through all the anger and viciousness from the press and public. She was with him for years where it seemed impossible he would ever be able to marry her or she would ever become Queen, so I don't think she was doing it with the expectation of those things down the road. I think she just loves him, and is happy they're now married to one another and able to just be together.
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 05:46:09 PM
As for Kate and Camilla, I have often seen photos of them animatedly talking or laughing at public events. I think if she was just being polite so as not to upset Charles, she would be doing just that: being polite and nothing more. What I've seen has convinced me that Kate does actually like Camilla. Your opinion may be different, of course.
:goodpost: Couldn't have said it better :notworthy: As you said. He was 15. We are all kids at that age. It is unfair to criticize someones adult character by extrapolating from their adolescent behaviour
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on July 07, 2014, 09:32:20 PM
We'll if William was actin bratty he learned from two parents who were great at bein bratty. I believe this event at Eton was during the war of the Wales' and I don blame him one but for not wanting the two instigators at a special school day, everyone who be focused on Charles and his wanting to love in Camilla's pants and Diana getting personal "riding lessons" from James Hewitt.
Camilla could not stand Tiggy. She was instrumental in having her fired and called her "the help." Charles was very touchy feely with Tiggy and wanted to show Diana the boys did not need her. Tiggy opened her big mouth and slammed Diana's mothering skills to the media and called William and Harry"her boys." This was like waving a red flag in front of Diana. She was stupid or had a nasty streak--I think it was a combination of both. Tiggy should have had the tact to talk to WIlliam about snubbing his parents and discouraged the idea of his inviting her.
I do think Camilla did not like the young woman around Charles and Tiggy did not invite Camilla to her wedding--just Charles and his sons. Only the boys showed up since Camilla was not invited.
Tiggy was of comfort to Harry especially after his mother died.
But I think it was wrong for WIlliam to do that.
Quote from: sandy on July 07, 2014, 11:36:39 PM
Camilla could not stand Tiggy. She was instrumental in having her fired and called her "the help." Charles was very touchy feely with Tiggy and wanted to show Diana the boys did not need her. Tiggy opened her big mouth and slammed Diana's mothering skills to the media and called William and Harry"her boys." This was like waving a red flag in front of Diana. She was stupid or had a nasty streak--I think it was a combination of both. Tiggy should have had the tact to talk to WIlliam about snubbing his parents and discouraged the idea of his inviting her.
How do we know Tiggy didn't have a tactful talk with William about not inviting his parents? How do we know she didn't try to discourage him from his not inviting them? There's a lot of talk here about how stubborn William is, so who knows ... maybe she tried, and maybe William said he'd do it his way. In any case, if Diana didn't like Tiggy calling William and Harry "her boys", or for any reason, she also should have had a tactful talk with Tiggy, asking her not to do so anymore. Walking up to her in front of several other people and making an extremely embarrassing comment was a hit below the belt.
Quote from: sandyI do think Camilla did not like the young woman around Charles and Tiggy did not invite Camilla to her wedding--just Charles and his sons. Only the boys showed up since Camilla was not invited.
There was no reason to invite Camilla to her wedding, since they were not friends and Camilla was not married to Charles, not even engaged. Tiggy did, however, allow her son to serve in William's wedding, and therefore be in Camilla's company that day, and probably many days before that, since surely there were rehearsals.
Cindy
Double post auto-merged: July 08, 2014, 12:09:52 PM
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on July 07, 2014, 03:07:18 AM
cinritCindy, I did not misread , misunderstand your post. I will not list the pics BUT THERE IS NOT ONE, ONE single photo in PW AND PH AND K are NOT all happy,smily with PCamilla in the picture.
Yes, exactly! That's exactly why I posted those pictures ... they are happy, they look like they're enjoying each other's company. It was to disprove the post that said William
never hides that he dislikes Camilla. It had absolutely nothing to do with anyone but William and Camilla. I'm sorry if you still don't understand, but that's okay. :hug:
Cindy
The logical answer Cindy dear was Tiggy allowed her son to serve in Williams wedding because William asked. Camilla had nothing to do with the wedding aside from playing step mummy grinning like a Cheshire cat sitting with the royal family. I hardly doubt Camilla spoke with the children aside from her own granddaughter. Tiggy is close to William and also Barbara Barnes and Jessie Webb also former nannies were invited. This wedding was all about William and Kate not about Camilla.
I didn't say the wedding was about Camilla. I said that the child was in Camilla's company quite frequently during that time. And he didn't look any the worse for wear. I don't know why you would think Camilla didn't talk to any of the children but her own grandchild. She's not an ogre. Children don't run from her on first sight! :lol:
Cindy
Quote from: Macrobug on July 07, 2014, 09:53:04 PM
Quote from: Canuck on July 07, 2014, 05:42:13 PM
I'm sure Will felt guilty after Diana's death about not inviting her to one of his last school events she could have attended, but that doesn't mean he was wrong to leave his parents out. I think it's pretty unfair to call that bratty when he was the kid and his parents were the ones waging public battles with one another without much regard for what it was likely to do to their kids.
I am in no way a Diana detractor -- I think she was a very admirable person -- but I am realistic about her role in things and don't think of her as a saint. I agree with those who think that Charles restarted things with Camilla before Diana cheated on him, and that she likely cheated only after finding out. I also agree with those who think Diana put more dirt in the press than Charles did, though both behaved pretty badly in that regard. And I do think Diana was incredibly nasty to Tiggy Legge-Bourke, who had done nothing to deserve it, including by publicly insinuating that she'd had an abortion and by insisting that she be left out of the boys' events because she was jealous of how close they were to Tiggy.
I think Will and Harry loved both their parents and that following Diana's death, Charles really stepped up to provide them with support and be as involved as possible in their lives. I think both of them genuinely love him and want the best for him, and that although they may not have been fans initially, they're now fine with him and Camilla being together.
As for Charles making Camilla happy, I think it's pretty clear he does. People can debate whether she deserved the public anger she received or not (my feeling: she did not behave well in carrying on an affair with Charles, but the level of vitriol she received was hugely out of proportion to her "crime", especially after Diana died and the public grief about that sort of got grafted onto everyone's feeling about Camilla). But if she didn't really love Charles I don't think she would have stuck it out through all the anger and viciousness from the press and public. She was with him for years where it seemed impossible he would ever be able to marry her or she would ever become Queen, so I don't think she was doing it with the expectation of those things down the road. I think she just loves him, and is happy they're now married to one another and able to just be together.
Double post auto-merged: July 07, 2014, 05:46:09 PM
As for Kate and Camilla, I have often seen photos of them animatedly talking or laughing at public events. I think if she was just being polite so as not to upset Charles, she would be doing just that: being polite and nothing more. What I've seen has convinced me that Kate does actually like Camilla. Your opinion may be different, of course.
:goodpost: Couldn't have said it better :notworthy: As you said. He was 15. We are all kids at that age. It is unfair to criticize someones adult character by extrapolating from their adolescent behaviour
I agree. Excellent summary Cannuck.
Quote from: cinrit on July 08, 2014, 11:53:08 AM
Quote from: sandy on July 07, 2014, 11:36:39 PM
Camilla could not stand Tiggy. She was instrumental in having her fired and called her "the help." Charles was very touchy feely with Tiggy and wanted to show Diana the boys did not need her. Tiggy opened her big mouth and slammed Diana's mothering skills to the media and called William and Harry"her boys." This was like waving a red flag in front of Diana. She was stupid or had a nasty streak--I think it was a combination of both. Tiggy should have had the tact to talk to WIlliam about snubbing his parents and discouraged the idea of his inviting her.
How do we know Tiggy didn't have a tactful talk with William about not inviting his parents? How do we know she didn't try to discourage him from his not inviting them? There's a lot of talk here about how stubborn William is, so who knows ... maybe she tried, and maybe William said he'd do it his way. In any case, if Diana didn't like Tiggy calling William and Harry "her boys", or for any reason, she also should have had a tactful talk with Tiggy, asking her not to do so anymore. Walking up to her in front of several other people and making an extremely embarrassing comment was a hit below the belt.
Quote from: sandyI do think Camilla did not like the young woman around Charles and Tiggy did not invite Camilla to her wedding--just Charles and his sons. Only the boys showed up since Camilla was not invited.
There was no reason to invite Camilla to her wedding, since they were not friends and Camilla was not married to Charles, not even engaged. Tiggy did, however, allow her son to serve in William's wedding, and therefore be in Camilla's company that day, and probably many days before that, since surely there were rehearsals.
Cindy
Double post auto-merged: July 08, 2014, 12:09:52 PM
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on July 07, 2014, 03:07:18 AM
cinritCindy, I did not misread , misunderstand your post. I will not list the pics BUT THERE IS NOT ONE, ONE single photo in PW AND PH AND K are NOT all happy,smily with PCamilla in the picture.
Yes, exactly! That's exactly why I posted those pictures ... they are happy, they look like they're enjoying each other's company. It was to disprove the post that said William never hides that he dislikes Camilla. It had absolutely nothing to do with anyone but William and Camilla. I'm sorry if you still don't understand, but that's okay. :hug:
Cindy
Tiggy could have turned down the invitation. This is the same woman who criticized Diana's parenting to the media. I think she got a sort of thrill about replacing Diana. I think what Tiggy did was below the belt. Tiggy had no business criticizing Diana's parenting publicly.
Why would Tiggy's son hang out with Camilla. Rehearsals are just that going through a practice run of the wedding. Actually Pippa was the one who had to take the children down the aisle. It was a private wedding but Tiggy did not invite Camilla. Camilla called her the "help" and did not like her. It is on record that Camilla was not invited.
Cindy, why would Harry and William be rude to Camilla in public? The royals are about appearances and happy families. Taking out photos does not really show how they think or feel about her. It's all speculation. Fergie sat at the breakfast table at Balmoral as if nothing happened when her topless photos were in the papers, according to eyewitness accounts.
I think William prefers being with Kate's family than he does being with Camilla.
Quote from: sandy on July 08, 2014, 01:44:03 PM
Why would Tiggy's son hang out with Camilla. Rehearsals are just that going through a practice run of the wedding. Actually Pippa was the one who had to take the children down the aisle. It was a private wedding but Tiggy did not invite Camilla. Camilla called her the "help" and did not like her. It is on record that Camilla was not invited.
I love how my posts get blown out of proportion. :thumbsup: I never said that Tiggy's son would "hang out" with Camilla. I said he would be in her company during the wedding and rehearsals. Hopefully, he was a polite young man and interfaced with everyone in the wedding party. Surely, he didn't sit in a corner by himself the whole time, in fear that he'd run into Camilla.
Quote from: sandyCindy, why would Harry and William be rude to Camilla in public?
I never said that, either. :D In fact, I said quite the opposite. I posted pictures to
prove just the opposite. End of story for me. I guess those who don't want to get it, won't get it no matter if I type until my fingers are blue. :lol:
Cindy
Quote from: sandy on July 08, 2014, 01:44:03 PM
I think William prefers being with Kate's family than he does being with Camilla.
Something we agree on! Will clearly loves being around Kate's family -- I think that's because, although he loves both his parents, his childhood was not a very stable one. I'm sure it is refreshing to him to be around a tight-knit family where the parents have (as far as we know) a happy marriage.
Cindy, Being in someone's company does not mean they get close. I doubt Tiggy's son has been in contact with Camilla since then. Camilla and Tiggy did not like each other according to various sources and Tiggy did not invite Camilla to her wedding even as a plus one for Charles. Nobody ever said he was scared of Camilla just that the two are not close. Why would they have any reason to be. He's a child and already has doting parents and other relatives of his own.
Pictures do not project into people's heads and tell us how they feel or think. As Trudie said the Queen Mother and Diana looked friendly to each other but that was not really the case. It is possible to keep up appearances.
Quote from: sandy on July 08, 2014, 02:05:10 PM
Cindy, Being in someone's company does not mean they get close. I doubt Tiggy's son has been in contact with Camilla since then.
Oh, good heavens! I did not say that they got close. Let's let it go, okay? Sometimes, I can't help but wonder if this is done on purpose. :happy15:
Cindy
It's not always about you Cindy. This is an opinion board.
I know it's not about me, Sandy, so why is it that almost everything I post about C/D/C gets blown out of proportion, and almost always "misinterpreted"? :lol: I know that game. If you don't like what I say, put me on ignore or just go on by, or PM me. Because, as you say, it's not about me (or you).
Cindy
Game? What game? You are stretching things a bit by accusing me of game playing. I am just giving my opinion and that is that. And I have every right to do t his without untrue accusations being tossed at me.
To summarize:
Tiggy calling Diana out about her mothering skills was nasty.
Photographs don't tell what people are t hinking or how they feel about other people. Certainly outsiders can speculate but a lot of smiley photographs don't always give the entire picture.
I read that Tiggy and Camilla did not get along.
I doubt that Tiggy or her family spends time with Camilla.
I never said Camilla scared children and nobody else did. I just said I doubt Camilla spent much time with the children at the rehearsal except perhaps her granddaughter.
That was it. So I am not getting all the accusations about game playing. This is a board about opinions not other posters.
I am not the only one on the thread to disagree with your opinion.
I know I was the one who brought Tiggy up, but I'm not really sure why the Tiggy/Camilla relationship is relevant. I mentioned some specific things Diana did to Tiggy that I thought were uncalled for -- my point was about Diana's overreaction and bad behavior, not about whether Tiggy is a saint. I'm confused as to why it matters whether or not Tiggy gets along with other people, including Camilla.
For what it's worth, I agree with Sandy that it sounds like Camilla didn't particularly like Tiggy. But she hasn't made public displays of that and obviously they're both able to attend the same events without it being a problem. I'd say they're on polite but not friendly terms, and there's nothing wrong with that.
I think any devoted mother would resent the nanny calling out publicly her parenting. It is relevant since Camilla called Tiggy the help (and perhaps other choice words) and was instrumental in getting her fired. Yet Diana gets slammed.
Diana's display was not "public" it was at a party. Of course it was not a nice way to react. But Tiggy actually to the media called Diana out. So Tiggy was the one that had the public display in every sense of the term. I don't see Tiggy as a victim or a saint. I do feel sorry for her because I think she had a crush on Charles that Charles took advantage of. He behaved inappropriately getting touchy feely with her (and there are photos of this). that is probably why Camilla got annoyed. Tiggy never went after Camilla about her parenting skills but I think Camilla did not like the coziness between Tiggy and Charles.
I don't think Tiggy and Camilla see much of each other if at all. No reason for them to see each other.
Quote from: cinrit on July 08, 2014, 02:31:01 PM
Quote from: sandy on July 08, 2014, 02:05:10 PM
Cindy, Being in someone's company does not mean they get close. I doubt Tiggy's son has been in contact with Camilla since then.
Oh, good heavens! I did not say that they got close. Let's let it go, okay? Sometimes, I can't help but wonder if this is done on purpose. :happy15:
Cindy
Cindy dear, why boter indeed! im out!
You're absolutely right, Amabel. :hug: And I'm out, too. :)
Cindy
Well just to be clear there were so many people at the wedding and wedding breakfast I doubt they interacted at all. If there was a receiving line all Tiggy had to do was drop a quick curtsy if she wanted to and moved on. It is possible to be in the same room with someone and not keep company with them.
Quote from: Canuck on July 08, 2014, 03:35:52 PM
I know I was the one who brought Tiggy up, but I'm not really sure why the Tiggy/Camilla relationship is relevant. I mentioned some specific things Diana did to Tiggy that I thought were uncalled for -- my point was about Diana's overreaction and bad behavior, not about whether Tiggy is a saint. I'm confused as to why it matters whether or not Tiggy gets along with other people, including Camilla.
So Tiggy was brought up to criticize Diana, any mention of what Tiggy might have done poorly as well with Diana or of her inability to maintain a proper relationship with either Diana or Zcamilla is irrelevant because what is important is to criticize Diana in a vacuum... :hmm:
I also think that Diana could not have spoken to Tiggy about her not talking to the media criticizing her mothering skills because Tiggy worked for Charles. I think Tiggy had a huge crush on the Prince--I don't think they were intimate but he behaved inappropriately with her (all touchy feely) and she felt confident enough to trash Diana publicly. Charles hired her as a surrogate mother not as a nanny to stick it to Diana.
Going to throw out a tricky question.
Does anyone here believe it is somehow disloyal for William and Harry to profess that they like or love Camilla?
I do. Very disloyal to their Mother. After the heartache C&C caused her.
However, I believe they are pleasant to Camilla because of Charles. The one that pays the piper. In normal life...children grow up and pay their own way and then make decisions whether to play happy families or not. W&H do not have that choice. William in particular has a very spendthrift wife and lifestyle. If he is not poncing off us, the TP, he is poncing off Charles. Big girls blouse!
She is their father's wife and would have been had Di been alive Today not much they can do about it as it their father's decision all they can do is respect it I don't see why it is disloyal to their mother how about the loyalty to their father?
I doubt they had much of a choice re: Camilla. I don't think they are disloyal to their mother since they talk about her and mention her and I don't think it a great big lovefest with Camilla. I doubt she's "Carol Brady" to them.
"After the heartache C&C caused her" - can I be any clearer, Eri? Put yourself in her situation.
As I posted above you....they keep Charles happy (I'm sure they love him, btw).
However, I also posted my reasons for them being "pleasant" to Camilla :shrug:
Quote from: sandy on July 09, 2014, 04:59:51 PM
I doubt they had much of a choice re: Camilla. I don't think they are disloyal to their mother since they talk about her and mention her and I don't think it a great big lovefest with Camilla. I doubt she's "Carol Brady" to them.
"love her to bits" (camilla) was VERY disloyal to their Mother IMO.
If she (and him) did that to my Mother I would not give her the time of day. No way. Royal or not.
However, Charles is paying for them. Once he is gone....things might change. Who knows.
I think it was a throwaway line by Harry. He never said anything about her that way before or since. I think his father may actually throw tantrums (Charles has been reported having temper tantrums one in which he uprooted a sink). I doubt Harry "loves her to bits" but maybe he did not want unpleasantness from his father which could have gotten ugly.
I also think William and Harry being used in Camilla campaign by their father was horrible. Harry was even reportedly drinking at age 13 during Charles birthday party where he had to play Happy Families with Camilla.
I agree. I doubt he "love her to bits" either. But imo, it was a very unloyal thing to say, no matter why he said it :hug:
What was worse was how William signed the marriage registry of his father and Camilla. And Camilla acting like mother of the groom at Wiliam's wedding was hard to take. She even played to the crowds (and got some boos from what I read).
What went on among William, Harry, and their father (behind the scenes) is subject to speculation.
At least Camilla did not get to go to the Diana Memorial Service. If they have another one, I think she'll try again.
Quote from: Limabeany on July 09, 2014, 04:49:45 AM
Quote from: Canuck on July 08, 2014, 03:35:52 PM
I know I was the one who brought Tiggy up, but I'm not really sure why the Tiggy/Camilla relationship is relevant. I mentioned some specific things Diana did to Tiggy that I thought were uncalled for -- my point was about Diana's overreaction and bad behavior, not about whether Tiggy is a saint. I'm confused as to why it matters whether or not Tiggy gets along with other people, including Camilla.
So Tiggy was brought up to criticize Diana, any mention of what Tiggy might have done poorly as well with Diana or of her inability to maintain a proper relationship with either Diana or Zcamilla is irrelevant because what is important is to criticize Diana in a vacuum... :hmm:
Sigh. I'm not trying to criticize Diana in a vacuum -- you'll notice I criticized Charles as well.
As for whether it is disloyal for Will and Harry to get along with Camilla, I would say absolutely not. It's been 20 years or more since the Diana/Charles/Camilla situation was going on. Whether you think one person was more to blame than the others, there was a lot of bad behavior all around. None of us are privy to everything that happened -- Harry and Will are much closer to the situation and should have the right to make their own judgments about it. They obviously feel at this point that they can have a relationship, of whatever type, with both Charles and Camilla. It's not really anyone else's place to say otherwise.
Diana died in 1997 that was not more than 20 years ago. Things were still brewing--Diana was still around when Charles started his Camilla promotion campaign and had that big party for Camilla at Highgrove.
Camilla did not raise William and Harry and they were grown ups when their father married her. How they feel about her is known only to them. I don't think they are that close. William often retreats to his in-laws instead of being with his father and stepmother.
:thanks: Sophie Chloe and Canuck for your answers to my tricky question.
Aww :hug:. Not sure I was much help. I can't stand the lady. Biased old me... :hug?:
Well let's just say I'd been thinking about it for awhile but wasn't sure how posters would take it. I appreciate your candor.
Quote from: Limabeany on July 09, 2014, 04:49:45 AM
Quote from: Canuck on July 08, 2014, 03:35:52 PM
I know I was the one who brought Tiggy up, but I'm not really sure why the Tiggy/Camilla relationship is relevant. I mentioned some specific things Diana did to Tiggy that I thought were uncalled for -- my point was about Diana's overreaction and bad behavior, not about whether Tiggy is a saint. I'm confused as to why it matters whether or not Tiggy gets along with other people, including Camilla.
So Tiggy was brought up to criticize Diana, any mention of what Tiggy might have done poorly as well with Diana or of her inability to maintain a proper relationship with either Diana or Zcamilla is irrelevant because what is important is to criticize Diana in a vacuum... :hmm:
Correct.
I think Harry's "I love her to bits" was to try to calm things down and make it been known he had 0 problems with Camilla at a time where she was still a very controversial figure ... Cam has been around Harry since he was 13/14 in no way shape or form a "grown up" and has been around more than Di has so maybe when he says something about a person who has been there all his life we should believe him :shrug: ...
Well if you are doing the numbers now Eri of course Camilla has been around Harry more then Diana who conveniently died when Harry was 12 a few weeks shy of his 13Th birthday however, Diana was his mother and a wonderful mother,Who was there for her son from birth and his formative years. Camilla was not there is whole life she met Harry a year after Diana's death and he was at Eton, then Gap year and Sandhurst and his military career so the reality is How exactly can you say Camilla has been around more then Diana?
They both probably get on well enough with her. She has more interests in common with the Royal family, than Di ever had. I think that while they of course Loved Diana dearly, they were probably going to grow away from her a bit as they got older because she was into a different kind of lifestyle, and they were pretty much traditional "country boys" like the majority of the royals and upper classes. Di hated Balmoral etc and the boys like it becase it gives them a palce to be away from the media, to pursue sports etc. Im sure as boys they were reluctant to embrace Cam beucase she had made Di unhappy but as time passed, they realised that their parents marriage had always been a difficult one and that Cam while she hadn't helped, problaby wasn't the main factor in breaking it up.
^ :goodpost: .
Quote from: amabel on July 10, 2014, 11:18:43 AM
They both probably get on well enough with her. She has more interests in common with the Royal family, than Di ever had. I think that while they of course Loved Diana dearly, they were probably going to grow away from her a bit as they got older because she was into a different kind of lifestyle, and they were pretty much traditional "country boys" like the majority of the royals and upper classes. Di hated Balmoral etc and the boys like it becase it gives them a palce to be away from the media, to pursue sports etc. Im sure as boys they were reluctant to embrace Cam beucase she had made Di unhappy but as time passed, they realised that their parents marriage had always been a difficult one and that Cam while she hadn't helped, problaby wasn't the main factor in breaking it up.
Diana never stopped the boys from being "country boys." Diana would have been a splendid Queen Consort. I disagree that she never "fitted in." She did not put up with the custom of the husband keeping a mistress and I don't blame her one bit for that.
I don't see Camilla having things in common with the royals considering the way she joined the family She usurped the wife's place as hostess at Highgrove and undermined the wife which mistresses like Lily Langtry would never even attempt to do. Camilla is quite fortunate --she could have been ousted like Wallis Simpson was.
The boys lost their mother and miss her and I doubt they have a love fest with the erstwhile other woman.
Double post auto-merged: July 10, 2014, 01:33:52 PM
Quote from: Trudie on July 10, 2014, 11:16:11 AM
Well if you are doing the numbers now Eri of course Camilla has been around Harry more then Diana who conveniently died when Harry was 12 a few weeks shy of his 13Th birthday however, Diana was his mother and a wonderful mother,Who was there for her son from birth and his formative years. Camilla was not there is whole life she met Harry a year after Diana's death and he was at Eton, then Gap year and Sandhurst and his military career so the reality is How exactly can you say Camilla has been around more then Diana?
I agree. Camilla could be around many more years but she is never going to replace Diana in her sons hearts.
Double post auto-merged: July 10, 2014, 01:35:42 PM
Quote from: Eri on July 10, 2014, 08:06:14 AM
I think Harry's "I love her to bits" was to try to calm things down and make it been known he had 0 problems with Camilla at a time where she was still a very controversial figure ... Cam has been around Harry since he was 13/14 in no way shape or form a "grown up" and has been around more than Di has so maybe when he says something about a person who has been there all his life we should believe him :shrug: ...
I think more likely Dad suggested Harry speak up for his stepmother and play happy families. I would be very surprised if Harry had done this without his father's suggesting it.
Camilla had nothing to do with raising Harry. Nothing. Harry was in school, he spent more time with Tiggy than Camilla (whom he looked to for comfort) and it was no Brady Bunch Scenario. Charles was busy doing PR for Camilla--Harry even started drinking at Highgrove while his father was away in Scotland with Camilla.
It really doesn't matter if someone raised you or not. If you like that person, you like that person, even if it's a step-parent. It doesn't mean that you stop loving your biological parent, or that you forget them.
Cindy
I don't think William and Harry are all that close to Camilla. It was very telling that William spent and spends a lot of time with his in-laws. I think he is much closer to them.
He possibly does like his in-laws better than he likes Camilla. That doesn't say anything except he likes them better. Also, take into consideration that Charles and Camilla are often on the run, on engagements, traveling ... so naturally, he's not going to see them as often as he sees the Middletons.
Cindy
I think he still likes the Middletons better no matter how much Camilla is away.
Camilla being away doesn't have anything to do with how much or how little William likes her. I was referring to how often William gets to spend time with Charles and Camilla, not how much he likes her. He probably likes Camilla well enough and gets along with her. That's fine, and that's enough.
Cindy
Quote from: cinrit on July 10, 2014, 01:45:05 PM
It really doesn't matter if someone raised you or not. If you like that person, you like that person, even if it's a step-parent. It doesn't mean that you stop loving your biological parent, or that you forget them.
Cindy
However accepting Harry and William may be of Camilla, they do not love her, IMO.
Quote from: cinrit on July 10, 2014, 01:55:24 PM
He probably likes Camilla well enough and gets along with her. That's fine, and that's enough.
Cindy
I agree with that 100%. I think he's on perfectly good terms with Camilla, and it's not really necessary he be anything more.
Quote from: Limabeany on July 10, 2014, 01:55:56 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 10, 2014, 01:45:05 PM
It really doesn't matter if someone raised you or not. If you like that person, you like that person, even if it's a step-parent. It doesn't mean that you stop loving your biological parent, or that you forget them.
Cindy
However accepting Harry and William may be of Camilla, they do not love her, IMO.
well since harry says he loves her to bits, then he must be lying
A person can say love ya as a throwaway line. He has not said anything before that or after that. He mostly talks about his late Mum and his father. I don't think it's a lovefest with Camilla.
Quote from: amabel on July 10, 2014, 02:38:29 PM
Quote from: Limabeany on July 10, 2014, 01:55:56 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 10, 2014, 01:45:05 PM
It really doesn't matter if someone raised you or not. If you like that person, you like that person, even if it's a step-parent. It doesn't mean that you stop loving your biological parent, or that you forget them.
Cindy
However accepting Harry and William may be of Camilla, they do not love her, IMO.
well since harry says he loves her to bits, then he must be lying
IMHO the only person who really knows how he feels about Camilla is Harry. I'm sure he's held a very wide range of opinions on her over the years. If he claims to love her then I can accept that he does.
In high school yearbooks, friends sign "love" which does not necessarily equate "love" in every sense of the term. And people can tell casual friends "love ya."
It speaks volumes that in the 9 years that Camilla has been his stepmother, he has only made such a statement once. He speaks many times of his brother, father, sister in law, and deceased mother.
He was being polite. I don't think that it is a lovefest with Camilla.
Charles and William came to pick him up when he returned from Afghanistan. Camilla did not go with his father and brother. I think they are cordial and friendly but a love fest I don't think so.
It is hard to imagine that Harry would be devoted to someone who hurt his mother. I think he accepted her for his father's sake.
Heavens. Are we really debating if someone luvs someone or loves them? Or loveloveloves them? As TLLK says, I am going to take what Harry said at face value. Because really, what does it matter?
:goodpost:
I don't think Harry loves Camilla. He is polite and cordial to her and is friendly to her at family events. He loves his father and accepted her for his father's sake. If it had not been for his father wanting to marry her I doubt he'd have given her the time of day. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
I don't really think anyone disagrees with that by much. He's polite and friendly to her, he accepted her for his father's sake, and of course if she wasn't with Charles he wouldn't ever see her or interact with her.
Here's the conundrum ... Camilla made Diana unhappy. But she made Charles happy. I'm sure William and Harry had a difficult time working that out in their minds since they surely love their mother and their father equally. By this time, it seems that everything's settled down, and they seem to be a happy and close family.
Cindy
Well they did accept Camilla for their father's sake. I think they are a close family with their father and accept his second wife. But it's no Brady bunch and Will and Harry have places of their own. She did not raise them. It does speak volumes though that William and Kate shared the news about her expecting a baby with her parents before Camila knew and even Charles knew.
Camilla is not a "replacement" for their mother so she cannot be plugged into the close family unit they once had with their parents. She is their father's wife and they are friendly but also she has her own family that she sees at her own establishment, Raymill.
And I doubt they had any choice but to accept Camilla. They did not want any family tensions because their father would be angry and resentful if they did not accept her. But the caveat is that since she made their mother unhappy they are not really as close to her as they were to Diana and are to Charles and it is no big lovefest.
Quote from: cinrit on July 10, 2014, 03:34:59 PM
Here's the conundrum ... Camilla made Diana unhappy. But she made Charles happy. I'm sure William and Harry had a difficult time working that out in their minds since they surely love their mother and their father equally. By this time, it seems that everything's settled down, and they seem to be a happy and close family.
Cindy
A reasonable scenario and one that many blended families have likely faced before.
He is meant to be the future King, not John Smith from no. 34 Arcadia Avenue.
Charles and Camilla shoud not have carried on with each other in the first place. What they both did to Diana was disgusting.
No, they shouldn't have had an affair. But it's now almost 20 years since Diana and Charles divorced, and Charles and Camilla have been married for 9 years. I think they, Will and Harry, and everyone else are entitled to move on at some point.
I've thought about this a lot. Personally I see that it is a matter of how much you value trust and loyalty in a relationship. For some reason, the upper classes don't seem to think it strange to have mistresses (probably because they oftentimes marry within their own small group).
I try to put myself in Diana's place and how I would feel about such a situation. Now to me, there is absolutely nothing worse in a relationship than cheating, I agree with SophieChloe; it's disrespectful, hurtful, and disgusting to me because once trust is lost in my mind, nothing can be salvaged. But then I think, that idea comes from how I was raised and what I've observed so it's totally biased.
I wish I did know the details of Charles and Diana's early marriage because who cheated first might help me make a decision on how to feel about both, but of course I don't. It is interesting because Diana was from the aristocracy so she must have known that it happened. Maybe it was just too much for her. And from my own personal, totally biased opinion lol, I think good for her for not taking it. But overall, I'd say that whether Camilla has "won your heart" or not depends on how you yourself view infidelity and whether it's a total dealbreaker for you in a person.
Quote from: Canuck on July 10, 2014, 07:11:58 PM
No, they shouldn't have had an affair. But it's now almost 20 years since Diana and Charles divorced, and Charles and Camilla have been married for 9 years. I think they, Will and Harry, and everyone else are entitled to move on at some point.
I feel that if the parties directly involved are able to move on or at least give the appearance that they have, then the rest of us bystanders should be able to also.
Charles and his minions have not "moved on" even this year Diana got put down by Charles cousin in an interview. They are not going to let go of the negativity about Diana. I believe Charles and Camilla are not the least bit sorry for what they did regarding Diana. Camilla apparently thought it OK to "honor Diana" at the Memorial Service.
History girlDiana went into the marriage in good faith. She had no lover watching her get married. Charles told his biographer he was involved with Camilla ca. 1979-80 when she was married to someone else. He decided he wanted heirs and I think he had every intention of keeping Camilla as his "friend." He passed off Camilla to Diana as his safe married friend and apparently Diana thought her harmless because she went with Charles for weekends with the PBs. She also was escorted by Camilla to polo matches and other events. Camilla "advised" her. I think Camilla was in it for herself and enjoyed being the mistress of the Prince of Wales and was not about to give it up. She was according to various sources not totally out of Charles life after he married Diana. Diana was hurt because Charles confided in Camilla and Charles even admitted he preferred Camilla when he married Diana--this was in the 1994 Dimbleby book. I call that cheating. If a man cannot commit he should not marry. Charles had his own "rules."
Diana had two children with Charles and there were no more children. Diana wanted more children. Diana said he went back to his lady after Harry was born. Even if he didn't sleep with her he abandoned Diana. Edward VII although he had mistresses did not leave his wife's bed. Nor were the mistresses permitted to undermine the wife or take over any of her hostessing duties. Camilla did that and more--she went to Stuart Higgins to give her side of the story. Camilla was IMO slick and manipulative and got what she wanted by this behavior.
Diana did not cheat first IMO. She was more or less ousted by Charles even though they kept up appearances in public and shared parenting of the two boys.
I do think it is a form of abuse for a husband to cheat. And I read in several books that Diana treated Diana with more contempt after he went back to Camilla. Some men feel guilty and buy the wives presents and are nice to them out of guilt. But Charles put down Diana in public and gave Camilla the jewels and Diana the paste.
Early on, IMO and those of some authors,Diana and Charles had a chance to work things out. But Charles because Diana was so popular wrote whining letters to his friends and being sycophants and thinking themselves "loyal" put down Diana. From then on it was a downward spiral.
Quote from: Macrobug on July 10, 2014, 07:24:11 PM
I feel that if the parties directly involved are able to move on or at least give the appearance that they have, then the rest of us bystanders should be able to also.
This sums up my feelings on the issue. :thumbsup:
Nobody knows the thought processes of those involved.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion no matter how those involved behave in public.
Diana and Charles put up appearances for years and the public was none the wiser.
Quote from: HistoryGirl on July 10, 2014, 07:18:30 PM
I wish I did know the details of Charles and Diana's early marriage because who cheated first might help me make a decision on how to feel about both, but of course I don't. It is interesting because Diana was from the aristocracy so she must have known that it happened. Maybe it was just too much for her. And from my own personal, totally biased opinion lol, I think good for her for not taking it. But overall, I'd say that whether Camilla has "won your heart" or not depends on how you yourself view infidelity and whether it's a total dealbreaker for you in a person.
well since Diana had an affair with a married man, Oliver Hoare, and a flfirtaiton with another, she was hardly innocent of damaging other people's marriages
^ She was free to do so. Her husband and his mistress were filling their loins....
She was free to hurt other peoples wives, but Cam was wrong to hurt her....
Talking about Diana's liaisons does not make Camilla right. The Hoares are still together. Whether or not there was a full blown affair between Hoare and Diana is subject to speculation. Jephson wrote he did not know the nature of their relationship. Hoare is not going to talk about it and Diana is dead. It's beating a dead horse to bring up Diana to try to whitewash what C and C did. Had Camilla not been around and Charles dumped her I doubt Diana would have looked at another man.
Camilla was in the drivers seat and it was not just an affair the woman manipulated things to her advantage and undermined Diana every step of the way even from the get go when she sent Charles gifts on his honeymoon with Diana.
Quote from: amabel on July 10, 2014, 08:03:13 PM
Quote from: HistoryGirl on July 10, 2014, 07:18:30 PM
I wish I did know the details of Charles and Diana's early marriage because who cheated first might help me make a decision on how to feel about both, but of course I don't. It is interesting because Diana was from the aristocracy so she must have known that it happened. Maybe it was just too much for her. And from my own personal, totally biased opinion lol, I think good for her for not taking it. But overall, I'd say that whether Camilla has "won your heart" or not depends on how you yourself view infidelity and whether it's a total dealbreaker for you in a person.
well since Diana had an affair with a married man, Oliver Hoare, and a flfirtaiton with another, she was hardly innocent of damaging other people's marriages
I never said she was. I was specifically speaking about the situation with her, Camilla, and Charles since the thread is about Camilla winning hearts after that situation.
Quote from: amabel on July 10, 2014, 08:07:50 PM
She was free to hurt other peoples wives, but Cam was wrong to hurt her....
IMO she would never have done so - if not for C&C's carrying on.
Diana went into the marriage in good faith. Charles did not and he told his true feelings to his biographer years later. Diana was an innocent at the outset. Diana was cut loose by Charles after she had the requisite heir and spare. Camilla was said to have told Charles no more children with Diana and I can believe that.
Camilla should have backed off if she had had a shred of decency.
I think the point people were making in mentioning Diana's affair with a married man is that it's not quite as simple as "Camilla had an affair with a married man, so she is irredeemably terrible forever." No one is saying what she and Charles did was okay. But people who do bad things are not necessarily bad people, and you can admire someone who did a bad thing years ago for things they've done since.
It was a lot more than just an affair. Camilla wanted it all and saw to it that she got it. It was not just sex it was being able to maneuver and manipulate. She reminds me of Wallis Simpson since she was manipulative and could push the right buttons with the Duke. But that said. Charles did not have the be all end all love--he had nothing to lose or sacrifice and got his heirs from his unfortunate first wife so they can all be happy with Camilla or so some of his fans say (not singling anybody on the board out I read this in the media)--the Duke gave up being King to be with her. Charles never pursed Camilla as a possible wife way back when even telling her to wait for him when he went to sea. I think it was a bad thing that Camilla undermined the wife going to Stuart Higgins and also playing hostess and redecorating Highgrove when Diana was away. None of Edward VII's mistresses would have dared trash the wife much less taken over hostessing duties at the wife's home.
It was a lot more than an affair. And the proof is Diana was out and Camilla now grins like a Cheshire Cat and has it all though she was not considered good enough apparently to have royal children (by Charles).
I generally tend to agree but it's all a matter of perception and how much infidelity means to you and how easily one can forget that. I can't judge people who say that they can't get over what Camilla did because I'm the same way when it comes to cheating. The same way I can't judge people who have moved past it because the way they view people is different. I don't think it makes either side wrong, just different.
Charles did not do right by Diana. He should have not let the mistress show disrespect for the mother of his children. It was more than cheating it was her active undermining of Diana. I still don't think C and C have moved past it I think they both feel they did nothing wrong and it was all Diana's fault. Charles never took any responsibility for the breakup and neither did Camilla.
Quote from: amabel on July 10, 2014, 08:03:13 PM
Quote from: HistoryGirl on July 10, 2014, 07:18:30 PM
I wish I did know the details of Charles and Diana's early marriage because who cheated first might help me make a decision on how to feel about both, but of course I don't. It is interesting because Diana was from the aristocracy so she must have known that it happened. Maybe it was just too much for her. And from my own personal, totally biased opinion lol, I think good for her for not taking it. But overall, I'd say that whether Camilla has "won your heart" or not depends on how you yourself view infidelity and whether it's a total dealbreaker for you in a person.
well since Diana had an affair with a married man, Oliver Hoare, and a flfirtaiton with another, she was hardly innocent of damaging other people's marriages
ll
Diana, Oliver Hoare or even Diane Hoare never admitted nor spoken about an affair and the Hoare marriage is still intact so throwing dirt on Diana to excuse the behavior of Camilla is really in poor taste when one considers that Diana is dead and all these so called lovers she supposedly had, have had almost 17 years to speak out. There has never been any proof provided that this so called affair ever happened only gossip. Charles admitted to loving up Camilla.
Quote from: Canuck on July 10, 2014, 08:23:48 PM
I think the point people were making in mentioning Diana's affair with a married man is that it's not quite as simple as "Camilla had an affair with a married man, so she is irredeemably terrible forever." No one is saying what she and Charles did was okay. But people who do bad things are not necessarily bad people, and you can admire someone who did a bad thing years ago for things they've done since.
So What exactly have they done since?
The last 7 pages should be deleted as all are off topic.
I only hope the moderators would enforce the rules.
Thanks :ugh: :orchid:
^ Could it be because the posts are truthful and not evil fiction that was found in another thread. Sorry but it seems you want rules enforced to suit you and obviously these posts are relevant as to Camilla winning peoples hearts.
[admin]We must allow threads to develop, in doing so we will see a divert onto other related topics as the thread develops.[/admin]
How is Diana's & Tiggy Legge-Bourke relationship have anything to do with the topic "How Camilla won our hearts".
On one page Tiggy Legge-Bourke is referenced 52 times.
So why does it bother you Queen Camilla Tiggy was not liked by both Camilla and Diana and has more to do with a surrogate role played out by both Tiggy and Camilla.
she hasn't won my heart - I accept she "won" and she will be Queen. When she does something positive I will acknowledge it. But she is not winning my heart.
^ That's the way I feel about it as well.
Quote from: SophieChloe on July 10, 2014, 08:16:45 PM
Quote from: amabel on July 10, 2014, 08:07:50 PM
She was free to hurt other peoples wives, but Cam was wrong to hurt her....
IMO she would never have done so - if not for C&C's carrying on.
that's hardly the point. the fact that she had bene hurt did not give her the right to hurt others
And slamming Diana does not make Camilla and Charles' behavior acceptable. Camilla did not get where she is today by being nice to others.
Quote from: cate1949 on July 12, 2014, 02:31:54 AM
she hasn't won my heart - I accept she "won" and she will be Queen. When she does something positive I will acknowledge it. But she is not winning my heart.
the person who made it possible for her to "win" was Diana. I don't believe that Cam parituclarly wanted to be Queen, though she'd naturally like it. I think she was happy enough with the status quo, and would have continued as C''s mistress for life.. and preferred a quiet country life to royal life...But once Diana broke up the marriage, publicly, it was inevitable that the question of Charles marrying Cam would then come up and it did and the public were willing to accept her as C's wife and queen...
Double post auto-merged: July 12, 2014, 01:27:57 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 10, 2014, 03:34:59 PM
Here's the conundrum ... Camilla made Diana unhappy. But she made Charles happy. I'm sure William and Harry had a difficult time working that out in their minds since they surely love their mother and their father equally. By this time, it seems that everything's settled down, and they seem to be a happy and close family.
Cindy
Im sure they do, and if Di had married another man whom they weren't too crazy about, I guess they would put up with him as well because he made their mother happy...Of course as kids they were most likely to support their mother but I think as they grew older they could see that she wasn't always easy to live with and that she and Charles had simply not hit it off and were not a good couple and while divorce Is always tragic, it may sometimes be necessary for healing...
^^^Good post amabel. I agree that if Diana had lived and found someone to marry that her sons would support the idea if they knew that man treated her well and they were happy together. It is possible that the feelings they have for Camilla would be similar to the ones they might have for a step-father. William and Harry have also seen their cousins' parents remarry and create blended families of varying success, so they know others of their generation that have experienced the same.
It is hardly an unusal situation, except that they are royal.
Quote from: amabel on July 12, 2014, 01:12:11 PM
Quote from: cate1949 on July 12, 2014, 02:31:54 AM
she hasn't won my heart - I accept she "won" and she will be Queen. When she does something positive I will acknowledge it. But she is not winning my heart.
the person who made it possible for her to "win" was Diana. I don't believe that Cam parituclarly wanted to be Queen, though she'd naturally like it. I think she was happy enough with the status quo, and would have continued as C''s mistress for life.. and preferred a quiet country life to royal life...But once Diana broke up the marriage, publicly, it was inevitable that the question of Charles marrying Cam would then come up and it did and the public were willing to accept her as C's wife and queen...
Double post auto-merged: July 12, 2014, 01:27:57 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 10, 2014, 03:34:59 PM
Here's the conundrum ... Camilla made Diana unhappy. But she made Charles happy. I'm sure William and Harry had a difficult time working that out in their minds since they surely love their mother and their father equally. By this time, it seems that everything's settled down, and they seem to be a happy and close family.
Cindy
Im sure they do, and if Di had married another man whom they weren't too crazy about, I guess they would put up with him as well because he made their mother happy...Of course as kids they were most likely to support their mother but I think as they grew older they could see that she wasn't always easy to live with and that she and Charles had simply not hit it off and were not a good couple and while divorce Is always tragic, it may sometimes be necessary for healing...
If Camilla did not want to be Queen she could have said no to Charles' proposal. Of course she enjoys being a royal wife. She looks like the cat that got the cream.
Charles broke up the marriage. The Queen ordered the divorce and Charles was said to be all in favor of a divorce. Diana said she did not want a divorce. He also broke up the marriage years ago by clinging to his mistress. A woman should not be expected to put up with this sort of thing. Diana was young and had her whole life ahead of her when Charles returned to his mistress--and there would be no more children after Harry.
Charles and Diana did not "hit it off" because Camilla as not going to go away and Charles did not totally drop her.
Double post auto-merged: July 12, 2014, 07:30:37 PM
Quote from: TLLK on July 12, 2014, 03:36:48 PM
^^^Good post amabel. I agree that if Diana had lived and found someone to marry that her sons would support the idea if they knew that man treated her well and they were happy together. It is possible that the feelings they have for Camilla would be similar to the ones they might have for a step-father. William and Harry have also seen their cousins' parents remarry and create blended families of varying success, so they know others of their generation that have experienced the same.
Diana's theoretical husband would not have been the one who was instrumental in the marriage breakup. For instance if she and Khan reconciled he had nothing to do with the Wales marriage disintegrating. Camilla was the "other woman" in the wales marriage. Big difference.
UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sandy and others, you are beating a dead horse. So AM I!! LOL!!
The Wonderful , Sweet ,Old Lady Camilla and loveheartsick Charlie really gets on nerves because so many us cannot separate fact from fiction and our OPINIONS to discuss facts FACTS.
PC is a prince. He , his age,and young adult years, times,was supposed to amrry a girl like LDS in every way. Nobility, titled,"untoucehed" as in no scandal...etc.
He did. He wanted to . He needed to. It was time for him to settle down from past girlfriends , startlets, others aristos, etc.
His age, role, was find a suitable wife as it was time adn have a family, his heirs , being he as the heir.
He did. He did this well. The girl loved him. Loved him. He liked her a lot. He wanted to and could have loved her.
Add his King sized ego and insecruities and he simply CHOSE not to. Enter old grirlfriend Camilla who had waiting arms always saying, "Come to Mama." FACT Fred adn Glayds NEVer quit. They went on nthe honeymoon. What does that tell? Ok, healthy h, cute babies, tours of the world and captiviating, conquering all work/duites of charities and then also, unphased, very impt. politicans, and conceited entertainers, well, they captivated them too. The Beauty The Brains were an international hit for themselves, their country and the BRF.
Weak, simply not trying PC and Mama Camilla KEPT it going.
PC NEVER gave his marriage to PD and his sons as a family nd even himself, PC , a chance.
FACT-3 people do not make a marriage. I am sure many of you know of some marriages of fam/friends in which the grooms 'mother or brides '' mother was invited in and stayed in and became the third spouse and yes, that marriage ended.
Cammilla NEVER wanted to and never did and was allowed to by PC to keep her stake in with him and the marriage .
They destroyed a young girls' hopes, dreams, life of family. They did.
Ok, PD made her madness in most childish ways as she was young: starving herself, throwing up food, fussing, Hewitt....DUMB. She had no mother, aunt, trusted Lady/Countess/Duke's dghter, etc. in her world to tell her how to handle such a situation of their world.
PC and PD divorced.
PC and C could then cont. their realtionship except for one roadblock who did not play her hand: enter pretty, fertile, young, aristo connected, fresh, pretty, pretty, uncomplicated, outdoorsey TLB. I wonder if she regrets she did not play her hand.LOL. No the woman has a gret husband and family of her own and the princes WnH trust.
PD was uspet there too with the pretty....TLB. New BRF little princes and some princesses could have been sired by PC with TLB.
TLB like PC's camp and C downgraded PD with ease, confidence when they wanted. IT was wrong on PC's part to let the MOTHER of his kids be treated in such a way in public. YES, common men with grilfriends stop at even that point. Girlfriends get some crumbs and have to wrok hard for that time with the married boyfriend, have limitations but still, they guys hold and keep the wife. perfect example. Mafia men may have had their girlfriends , goombas' but they went not going to the family home. Decorate it. See the kids. They had better not say a gd word about the wife. They could do their job of sleeping with thier married men and gets some gifts, apt., but it stopped about there. Why? Common men do not want to leave that wife ,who lets them carry on, to marry the _______. These type guys, even if wifey leves, they don't marry the _____.
PD dead. PC and C got married , became K n Q to be, and lived happily ever after.
THe young princes grew up somewhat around C. She did not raise them She had no hadn in doing so. She did birth them. According to the PC spin, pr amchines, TPTB, etc. sooner or later the story will be that did. Many of you and the public will buy it too. LOL!!!
FACT the guys had QEIII, PP, TPTB and assorted friends to help guide them. They have their own friends. PW, his own family and extended family of the Midds he is very close to " Mom and Dad"-Midds.
All of this above ARE THE FACTS. The pr spin of QCam to be winning hearts is pr spin. The image of sweet ,older divorced lady, old girlfriend of PC, two lonely hearts who met up through friends ...is SIMPLY NOT TRUE!!! YES, people are accepting as they MUST. THE BRIT MUST accept her. It is non-negotiable. It is not up for vote. When she tours The UK, she must get and does get the respect of the press which consists of her subjects, and that of her subjects, the people. She will be Queen Camilla I after the EII dies...one day...she will die one day...some day. I think in 10 years. No, I do not have a crystal ball, so it might be in 6 months , Who knows!!
The rewriting ,as some you want to do, of PC and PD and Camm is totally off. Fiction. Untrue. It did not happen that way. It is not my opinion or his or hers posting here, but the FACTS are the FACTS.
No doubt W and H love their fahter. No doubt they tolerate and have made peace with Cam. No doubt they are cordial to her. I do not believe they love her like a mother...love her to bits...If you think and I am sure you do think they love her to bits, like a mother, wishes she was their bio mother, etc. FINE. Believe it!!!!!!!Believe it. I cannot make you believe anything and you cannot make me believe anything!!!
The only way the people will know the true feelings of W and H towards C is if PC dies before her, DofCorn. If PC dies before C is Q , will W and H have her around for their life events? Etc. Where will she live? CH or her own home? Will QEII still keep her in the BRF fold?
Tht is the only way to know.
I think , my OP, if PC dies before C,DofCorn, I bet you the Princes will be done with her.
If PC adn C live to be K and Q and no doubt they will, you will see W and family, H and family at Sandringham, Balmoral with Queen Camilla and TPB and family, Lady Lopes and family. THAT will be the face of the BRF.
And you will see pictures of W and H and their families all walking and smiling with the K and Q and the PB adult kids and their families.
A united front .
To me PC and C got where they are by destroying another, Cam got all she wanted and more by default-PD's death was the default the added , unexpectd bonus. Cam to me represents someone doing wrong and getting righted for it. NO, I am not saying she is not good in her role, because she is. I CAN SEPARATE emotions. EMOTIONS. You have to take your OPINION and EMOTIONS out of something to see it objectionably. With facts FACTS.
Cam is the cat who got the cream. Survivor of the fittest. The past is not the past in that it should be erased or rewritten in a nice version. THAT is the issue I and others have with some of you about this subject. Still, watever you want to believe, fine. I cannot get in your brain and change your mind, LOL!!
Some fo us just always point out THE TRUTH or was. Now Cam is queen of hearts, you her subjects over, fine.
What is, is that PD is dead and so it makes everything easy and nice for Cam and C. Boy talk about some people have all the luck! What a lucky break that was. What a great gift from fate....wonderful twist and final nail in the story. Game changer it was.
Makes no difference in my life and any of the Americans, and other foreingers here.
Quote from: amabel on July 12, 2014, 01:12:11 PM
Quote from: cate1949 on July 12, 2014, 02:31:54 AM
she hasn't won my heart - I accept she "won" and she will be Queen. When she does something positive I will acknowledge it. But she is not winning my heart.
the person who made it possible for her to "win" was Diana. I don't believe that Cam parituclarly wanted to be Queen, though she'd naturally like it. I think she was happy enough with the status quo, and would have continued as C''s mistress for life.. and preferred a quiet country life to royal life...But once Diana broke up the marriage, publicly, it was inevitable that the question of Charles marrying Cam would then come up and it did and the public were willing to accept her as C's wife and queen...
Double post auto-merged: July 12, 2014, 01:27:57 PM
Quote from: cinrit on July 10, 2014, 03:34:59 PM
Here's the conundrum ... Camilla made Diana unhappy. But she made Charles happy. I'm sure William and Harry had a difficult time working that out in their minds since they surely love their mother and their father equally. By this time, it seems that everything's settled down, and they seem to be a happy and close family.
Cindy
Im sure they do, and if Di had married another man whom they weren't too crazy about, I guess they would put up with him as well because he made their mother happy...Of course as kids they were most likely to support their mother but I think as they grew older they could see that she wasn't always easy to live with and that she and Charles had simply not hit it off and were not a good couple and while divorce Is always tragic, it may sometimes be necessary for healing...
If you don't believe Camilla wanted it all I have a Bridge and a Clock to sell you in London.
Camilla's behavior over the decades has given me the impression that she has no desire for the spotlight or to be Queen. But once it came out that she was with Charles and they both got divorced, she could hardly remain the Prince's mistress forever. Perhaps one of the reasons she has seemed to win the publics heart is because she is loyal to Charles and people respect that no matter how bad it gets she won't talk to the press.
Or maybe a large part of it is that William and Harry have accepted her and all appearances say they get on fine with her and her kids. I often read that Laura especially hated Charles for awhile; I would love to know how both Charles and Camilla smoothed over things with each other's children. I tend to think that some hard questions had to end up being answered.
^ How to smooth things over Katerina IMO Trustfunds and why not remain his mistress forever she had better benefits living with him a palace, no duty and plenty of staff to cater to her not to mention the gifts of jewelry and clothes. Nope for Camilla it became all about the bows and curtsy's, Bling especially the Tiaras and priceless jewels and one day First Lady in the Land.
I'm a Diana fan, but I do actually believe that Camilla was quite content as Charles's mistress. She had her own (reputedly messy) home, casual country lifestyle with lots of gardening and horse riding, seeing her friends and family when she liked, and Charles paying most of the bills. Ideal!
Charles was supposedly becoming a bit restive by 2005. The Queen wasn't getting any younger and he was fretting over his public image should he suddenly become monarch, a bachelor monarch with a well-known mistress. This would not be a good look. So, with his sons off his hands, Charles persuaded Camilla into marriage.
Even today, Highgrove is too formal for her and she escapes for a time to her own home, even if it costs taxpayers more in additional security measures.
She had a choice. If she really felt repelled at being Queen she could have 1) not become the Prince of Wales mistress and later 2) said no to his proposal. The spin is she "never wanted anything." If she did not want anything she would have moved on with her life after the Prince got engaged to another woman and let the first wife be a royal.
And it should be remembered that one motive for the marriage was that the two could never sit together at royal events and even could not sit together at a wedding of one of their friends (the Van Cutsem's) children. Camilla and Charles were said to be quite angry. It is one thing to have a Prince foot the bills another that they were not allowed to be together in public. Also I doubt Camilla's father (who complained to Charles) would want to see his daughter remain a mistress after Charles called her out publicly as his mistress. And once the APBs divorced Charles became obligated.
Charles also was about to have his finances investigated. The $$$ spent on his mistress would certainly have been investigated. So out came the engagement ring and an engagement was soon announced.
Camilla seems to enjoy the trappings of royalty just fine and was even able to keep her home Raymill to retreat to.
Double post auto-merged: July 13, 2014, 02:04:54 AM
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on July 13, 2014, 12:09:50 AM
Camilla's behavior over the decades has given me the impression that she has no desire for the spotlight or to be Queen. But once it came out that she was with Charles and they both got divorced, she could hardly remain the Prince's mistress forever. Perhaps one of the reasons she has seemed to win the publics heart is because she is loyal to Charles and people respect that no matter how bad it gets she won't talk to the press.
Or maybe a large part of it is that William and Harry have accepted her and all appearances say they get on fine with her and her kids. I often read that Laura especially hated Charles for awhile; I would love to know how both Charles and Camilla smoothed over things with each other's children. I tend to think that some hard questions had to end up being answered.
I don't think William and Harry spend much time with Tom and Laura. Maybe at some family events but I doubt they are close. Laura never hated Charles. I certainly don't care how they "smoothed things over." I don't think any of the children had a choice really. Tom and Laura got those trust funds from the Prince and Tom gets to mention "Sir' On his book jackets but does not mention his father Andrew Parker Bowles--it's all about Mum and Sir when he promotes his books.
Camilla did some talking to the press--when she talked to Stuart Higgins. She undermined her predecessor and got most of what she had. If she did not want anything, she would have butted out of Charles' marriage to Diana. She accepted the bling Charles gave her and the perks.
As far as "winning hearts" I don't think you can claim that she won "everyone's heart." Charles will do as he pleases no matter what. She will never be universally beloved to put it mildly.
If she had been "loyal" to Charles she should have not undermined his wife and left the picture once he got engaged to Diana. She had no intention of giving up her Sugar Daddy. How can a married woman be "loyal" to her lover when she's supposed to be loyal to her husband. Charles even married another woman while she was being "loyal" to him. Something wrong with this picture.
Double post auto-merged: July 13, 2014, 02:06:02 AM
Quote from: Trudie on July 13, 2014, 12:27:58 AM
^ How to smooth things over Katerina IMO Trustfunds and why not remain his mistress forever she had better benefits living with him a palace, no duty and plenty of staff to cater to her not to mention the gifts of jewelry and clothes. Nope for Camilla it became all about the bows and curtsy's, Bling especially the Tiaras and priceless jewels and one day First Lady in the Land.
She grins for those cameras and poses proudly in the tiaras and bling. She wanted this. Big Time.
I forgot about the Edward van Cutsem wedding, Sandy. Thanks for reminding me about that very amusing episode. It brought a lot back. I believe the van Cutsem parents were still stewing over some feud with Mark Bolland from years before. It involved allegations Bolland made about the van Cutsem boys at the time when Camilla heard, via Charles, that Hugh and Emillie had said that Tom PB took drugs! That revelation went down well!
Anyway, Hugh and Emillie made the excuse that Camilla couldn't possibly sit next to Charles as the Queen and Prince Philip were attending the wedding (to the Duke of Westminster's daughter.) She was going to be seated four rows back, on the bride's side of the aisle! I think, from memory, Charles didn't attend in the end.
Once again my ears FACTS.
Of course Camila did not show desires to be Qof the land because then SHE COULD NOT. Could not until PC and D divorced.
Curry, KaTern, she has all that you both said and more. Still has her gardening, messy house, etc and CP paying for it all.
She was content as girlfriend because that IS ALL she could be BUT even then, SHE WAS HIS WIFE, just not legally and in front of the world. Cams' place was at HG as hostess/ladyof the manor, in friends of hers and PC's, her family of siblings, etc. The safe houses given for romantic times by PC and C's friends ....
After PH was born, PC had completed his job there. JOB. PD was simply part of PC's JOB. Nothing more was she ever and nothing less was SHE. Just the vehicle, the breeder was PD. If he could have bred asexually, then he would have, LOL!!!!.
FACTS. lets take the emotion out of it and keep FACTS.
YES, Q Amilla tpo be has won her subjects hearts and prayers. How nice for her and PC. Of course, the subject is not open for vote so the people can do nothing but accpet, attend her coronation...etc. I mean turn off your tv's if you do not like her and PC. Accepting QCam to be is really irelevant. Time has been , is always a good tool for things. Time since PD died. Time since the princes grew up. Time since QEII has had the big anniversary. Time. Time DOESNOT ERASE what was, just gives time
^I totally agree. I mean let's not get it twisted, all these royals (and royal hanger-ons) enjoy the perks and the deference. Status is very important to them; being treated like a mistress isn't desirable when there's an opportunity to be treated with the respect that a Queen gets, but of course, when their affair began all she could be was a mistress which was better than not being attached to a prince at all.
Quote from: Curryong on July 13, 2014, 01:12:52 AM
I'm a Diana fan, but I do actually believe that Camilla was quite content as Charles's mistress. She had her own (reputedly messy) home, casual country lifestyle with lots of gardening and horse riding, seeing her friends and family when she liked, and Charles paying most of the bills. Ideal!
Charles was supposedly becoming a bit restive by 2005. The Queen wasn't getting any younger and he was fretting over his public image should he suddenly become monarch, a bachelor monarch with a well-known mistress. This would not be a good look. So, with his sons off his hands, Charles persuaded Camilla into marriage.
Even today, Highgrove is too formal for her and she escapes for a time to her own home, even if it costs taxpayers more in additional security measures.
there was no way that Cam could remain C's mistress, when he became King. She knew that, and was willing to go with it. however I think her personal preference would have been to remain living with him quietly and not doing public duties.
I guess we will witness how Will and Harry REALLY feel about Cam if Chuck dies first and he can't witness how they treat her ... as for the public goes she is a public figure some will like her , some will not there will be indifferent but you can't deny she has come along way since the days she must have been scared to leave her home ...
I don't think Camilla was ever "scared." If she were not nervy she would not be where she is today.
I doubt Camilla would have been "content" to live quietly as the mistress. She looks like the cat that got the cream. She could have said no to Charles proposal but did not.
Quote from: Eri on July 13, 2014, 10:48:56 AM
I guess we will witness how Will and Harry REALLY feel about Cam if Chuck dies first and he can't witness how they treat her ... as for the public goes she is a public figure some will like her , some will not there will be indifferent but you can't deny she has come along way since the days she must have been scared to leave her home ...
You really think they will ignore their father's widow? I'm sure they get on well enough with Camilla, find her congenial and are OK with her as C's wife, and even if they didn't like her much, they would treat her politely and with respect for their fathers sake,, and they would not broadcast any trouble int eh family.
^ We will see I guess ...
If you really think that they are going to treat Cam with less than respect, even after their father's gone I simply can't understand that. There has been enough of making public private disputes, in the RF and they are well aware of that.
Camilla has her own family she spend time with. She would come for court events but I doubt she'd be as visible as she would be as Queen. She would be up there in age by then and would want to spend time with her grandchildren and children.
^^^I completely agree sandy. She'll likely go into a happy and comfortable retirement should he pass away before he does.
Quote from: amabel on July 13, 2014, 12:09:36 PM
Quote from: Eri on July 13, 2014, 10:48:56 AM
I guess we will witness how Will and Harry REALLY feel about Cam if Chuck dies first and he can't witness how they treat her ... as for the public goes she is a public figure some will like her , some will not there will be indifferent but you can't deny she has come along way since the days she must have been scared to leave her home ...
You really think they will ignore their father's widow? I'm sure they get on well enough with Camilla, find her congenial and are OK with her as C's wife, and even if they didn't like her much, they would treat her politely and with respect for their fathers sake,, and they would not broadcast any trouble int eh family.
Pardon my typos in previous post. I need a new laptop. I will probably buy one this week.
to answer your question, YES. No one knows how they feel and won't know unless PC dies first.
Be PC dying first and Camm is DofCirn or QofEnglan.
When people die, all bets are off and true feelings, thoughts come out.
I am sure I am not the only person here who has seen family/friends and their families, waht happens when ,lets say, the parents die.
Sometimes it can get ugly, with a legal will and all the works with with it, and with others, it is ok. A closer relationship happens.
Will Cam be at H and W 's private family moments if PC dies first? We will wait and see. MY OPINION is they will not include Cam, DofCorn or , Goodness, I hope she never makes it as Q.
Example.
PD is dead. Their father, I am sure , never encouraged a relationship between HIS sons and the Spencer aunts, cousins. Many times this happens in a relationship.
Today, no big news there, but they ARE NOT that close to the Spencer aunts, uncle and cousins. Yeah, PW took the baby to see an aunt one day. K went to represent him at a Spencer wedding. A Spencer aunt or two went to W's military thing. Big deal.
NO, I do not know. Maybe they call and talk everyday, LOL!!! Maybe they visit all the time, LOL!!! Yeah , right!!!
W adn H are very close to the Windsor cousins and family: B and E, Z and her brother and family, and all.
MY OPINION and common sense really, whan QEII dies and she will one day, some day, the BRF at Balmoral, Sandring, Buckbalcony will be with Cam's kids and grandkids. As QofEn, what does anyone expect her to leave her kids and grandkids?
I should think not!
Queen rules! What the Q says goes and Q Cam will mahve her say adn that will be that.
Quote from: TLLK on July 13, 2014, 08:52:46 PM
^^^I completely agree sandy. She'll likely go into a happy and comfortable retirement should he pass away before he does.
I agree with both of you, she will go to her house and spend time with her family and friends.Her love of Charles is the only thing keeping her in that world, but she, by all accounts is more comfortable in non-posh more familiar surroundings.
Quote from: amabel on July 13, 2014, 12:09:36 PM
Quote from: Eri on July 13, 2014, 10:48:56 AM
I guess we will witness how Will and Harry REALLY feel about Cam if Chuck dies first and he can't witness how they treat her ... as for the public goes she is a public figure some will like her , some will not there will be indifferent but you can't deny she has come along way since the days she must have been scared to leave her home ...
You really think they will ignore their father's widow? I'm sure they get on well enough with Camilla, find her congenial and are OK with her as C's wife, and even if they didn't like her much, they would treat her politely and with respect for their fathers sake,, and they would not broadcast any trouble int eh family.
No one knows how they will treat Camilla however, the only relationship they have with her is as their fathers wife. Once he is gone and if she lives Camilla has her own children she never had royal children i.e. Half siblings for William and Harry to have a tie to her. One question will be her living arrangements Clarence house is not Charles house in that he doesn't own it and neither does he own Highgrove the Duchy of Cornwall owns it so as in the Aristocracy the Widow usually vacates the house so the heir moves in.
obviously just my opinion .....
if PC leaves before Cam - W and H will treat her with the greatest respect at the ending rituals etc - and then she will disappear into her private life. No more invites.
Cam's kids will not play any sort of big role in the BRF if she becomes Queen. It will be all about PC and his heirs. Of a necessity.
If PC makes it to the throne - and personally - after all his waiting - I hope he gets his moment - the coronation ceremony will be more low key less elaborate perhaps than the Queen's - so perhaps the issue of Cam's role may not be so big an issue. She may end up as Queen consort - but not necessarily be "crowned" at the coronation of PC. Such an approach will mollify those opposed to Cam as Queen but still give her the honor he wants her to have.
I do not know if she ever aspired to be Queen - but she sure was determined to exercise a very big role in his life - more than one's average mistress. I think she was a dominant figure in his life - he is often indecisive - she is the decider. She - even when he was still married - was a big figure in his "court" - their group of friends and social events. They went to parties together - Diana was excluded. She was hostess at Highgrove. They used to meet at that club Annabel's. That sort of thing. So while she may not have hoped to be Queen in those days - she sure liked her status and asserted it. As in "I may be the mistress but I am still number 1". I wonder if she had been more circumspect - Charles too - if Diana would have gone so ballistic
Look at W and K wedding footage - parts where Cam looks distraught - on the verge of tears - very upset. Don't know why - but maybe she pays a price we do not see or know of. She may not enjoy "winning" as much as we think.
Camilla still grins for the cameras and poses in bling. I don't think she has any regrets.
Camilla knew Diana was upset from the get go and her sending the cufflinks to Charles was to show Diana who was boss. IMO anyway. APB was well trained to be civilized but obviously Diana was not willing to "share." If she were she'd play the game and make nice with Camilla and think it an honor that Charles chose HER and let Charles have his fun with Camilla and they all could Play Nice. According to the Settlelen tapes she asked Charles why that woman (Camilla was always around). I don't think it would have made any difference if Camilla was "circumspect". Diana told Bashir that well meaning friends told her about Camilla and her relationship with Charles and Diana talked about her instinct making her aware her husband was cheating. Camilla had no business being hostess at Highgrove. She usurped Diana's place and even undermined Diana. Lily Langtry and other mistresses of Edward VII never dared to do this nor did they insult the royal wife.
Charles also would not spend megabucks (beginning ca. 1997) to hire a spin doctor to work on Camilla's image--to keep her as a mistress. She knew darn well the promotion to wife was the object of the PR. Even in Diana's lifetime, a documentary was prepared about Camilla's life and Charles had planned to escort her to a charity event that Fall.
Bradford wrote that unlike straying husbands who feel guilty and are nice to their wives, Charles was more hostile to his wife when he went back to Camilla.
APB was not trained to be civilized .... he was cheating on Camilla long before she cheated on him. He knew how to play the game because he initiated it.
For anyone who thinks, or hopes, that Camilla would fade into the background should Charles predecease her, that might be fine for William and Harry, though I would hope they wouldn't drop her like a hot potato. I think they were both raised better than that. But let's don't forget that it's not just William and Harry anymore ... there's a child to be considered now. Hoping that Charles has many more good years here on Earth, there will probably be more than one child, and those children will have spent time with Camilla and possibly have gotten close to her. Were she to simply drop out of sight, they'd probably miss her. She's a step-grandmother, absolutely ... but, without disrespect to Diana, she's still a grandmother figure that they will have known from birth.
Cindy
There were advantages for him to be "civilized." Camilla was not apparently "miserable" enough to divorce APB and she could have. The civilized relationship suited them fine. And APB accepted it--it is subject to speculation how and why he accepted it. He could have been "trained" or "encouraged" by the "perk": of being "in" with the Prince of Wales and his circle. APB and CPB cheated on each other rampantly during their courtship so the outcome of their marriage should not have come as much of a surprise to either of them. Although she did her duty and had the two children for him.
Camilla has her own grandchildren to get close to. She is not George's grandmother and I think Wiliam and Harry will talk about their mother to their children. Since she never raised William and Harry Camilla can't talk to the children about how she raised their parents. The boys will talk about how they were raised by Diana, the childrens' grandmother. There is no "child" to consider for Camila--she has many of her own to spend time with. The children will have a grandmother figure who is an actual grandmother: Carole Middleton and the mother of Harry's future wife. And I don't doubt the children will be proud to be Diana's grandchildren and learn all about ther.
George IMO will be a lot closer to his grandmother Carole since IMO William is a whole lot closer to Kate's family than he ever will be with stepgrandmother Camilla.
Camlla I doubt will try to play grandmother with Diana's children. I hope so anyway.
I guess if Chuck dies first it's not like Will and Harry will pull a Charles Spencer and Di and get physical with her but it will be telling if they "ice her out" ... that would certainly make them liars and hypocrites if they change their behavior towards her ...
Hypocrisy lives in that family. Camilla was nice and friendly to Diana as long as she did not complain about the "friendship" she had with Charles. The boys will be polite but I doubt it is one big love fest with Camilla.
APB was trained to be civil and accept Cam with PC.It was most benefical to him too. Just like it was an honor to be mistress #12 as Alcie Kreppel was and her husband and family gained good rank/prizes, LOL, because of it. APB liked Cam being with PC. Cam did not mind APB had his girlfriends , including her late friend which he married.... Rosemary.
APB and Cam are good friends.
Always was. Always will be. Their divorce was nothing close to PC and PD.
This is not my opinion , but FACTS.
How will W and H treat Cam if PC dies first, we shall see. Personally, I think she will be make it to QCamilla and bury KCharles.
THEN, she will be Dowager Q is it?
Where will she live?
See Trudie 's post .
I think, Trudie if you will, start a new thread about that. Very interesting.
^ I think I will Fan
Quote from: cinrit on July 14, 2014, 10:25:20 AM
APB was not trained to be civilized .... he was cheating on Camilla long before she cheated on him. He knew how to play the game because he initiated it.
Cindy
Re Andrew PB, I think that he did act in a civilised manner after the manner of his class in pursuing his affairs, post marriage, keeping them away from home and when Cam took a lover, he kept his distance and ignored it. And he stood by Camilla, although I think he would have preferred a divorce, earlier, because he knew that if they split up, it would leave her exposed as Charles' mistress. He only went for a divorce when the affair was publicly outed and Charles Had admitted that Cam was his lover and there was the implication that if her marriage broke up, he would look after her and marry her. and he and Cam seem to have remained good friends after the divorce. And all in all I think that he and She have handled the situation of being divorced parents and her being remarried quite well. I am sure that Will and Harry have had their bad times with the idea of her replacing their mother, but it seems to me that they are over that now and get along with her well enough and that she and Charles will be around with little George..adn other children that Willa adn Kate or harry and his wife may have. And if Ch predeceases Cam, they will remain on friendly terms with her.. I don't know why they should not.
Not everybody in APB's "class" behaved that way and cheated. Civilised seems to be a polite word for cheating in those that followed the practices of APB and CPB.
Quote from: TLLK on July 04, 2014, 11:34:39 PM
In hindsight it would have been better for Diana to have taken her mother's advice to heart and not marry Charles. Frances appeared to have a better understanding of the BRF's expectations in the early 1980's and more likely knew about Charles' feelings for Camilla. Charles should have not pursued someone with very different interests from his own. :(
I don't believe her mother made any real attempt to dissuade her.. what has been said sounds half hearted, "are you sure you're not marrying him because of who he is"... and as for charles, I believe that he thought that Di shared many of his interests. She claimed ot like country life, she seemed to enjoy Balmoral, She watched him shooting and IIRC playing polo. If Diana didn't share his interests why did she go out with him? She must have realised she didn't realy like country life, shooting etc, so why not turn down invites when she must have known that she didn't like the same tings?
Quote from: amabel on September 14, 2014, 09:23:39 PM
Quote from: TLLK on July 04, 2014, 11:34:39 PM
In hindsight it would have been better for Diana to have taken her mother's advice to heart and not marry Charles. Frances appeared to have a better understanding of the BRF's expectations in the early 1980's and more likely knew about Charles' feelings for Camilla. Charles should have not pursued someone with very different interests from his own. :(
I don't believe her mother made any real attempt to dissuade her.. what has been said sounds half hearted, "are you sure you're not marrying him because of who he is"... and as for charles, I believe that he thought that Di shared many of his interests. She claimed ot like country life, she seemed to enjoy Balmoral, She watched him shooting and IIRC playing polo. If Diana didn't share his interests why did she go out with him? She must have realised she didn't realy like country life, shooting etc, so why not turn down invites when she must have known that she didn't like the same tings?
Possibly because Diana, who had never had a serious relationship, was a very young 19 at the time. I believe she was in love with a Disney-style prince, a Barbara Cartland-type older man who would sweep her away to his palace and always love her, always protect her, make the pain of her childhood memories go away. It wasn't the real flesh and blood man she was in love with at all. With her engagement reality started to dawn.
^^ In other words, she was in love with "who he was"....?
Cindy
^^ I don't think the young Diana was in love with Charles in a 'gold-digger' type way, Cindy, even though her sister Sarah had tried and failed to win him, and sibling rivalry perhaps played a part. I believe that Diana saw Charles almost as a sanctuary, because a Prince of Wales would never, never divorce, and she would therefore be safe and loved for ever.
^^^Hadn't thought about it that way. I would have found it surprising for a P and P of Wales divorcing too so this could be taken by her as a sign that she'd always be married.
Quote from: Curryong on September 14, 2014, 10:03:48 PM
^^ I don't think the young Diana was in love with Charles in a 'gold-digger' type way, Cindy,
I don't think so, either, Curryong. But I think the fact that he was/is the Prince of Wales was quite head-turning.
Cindy
Quote from: Curryong on September 14, 2014, 10:03:48 PM
^^ I don't think the young Diana was in love with Charles in a 'gold-digger' type way, Cindy, even though her sister Sarah had tried and failed to win him, and sibling rivalry perhaps played a part. I believe that Diana saw Charles almost as a sanctuary, because a Prince of Wales would never, never divorce, and she would therefore be safe and loved for ever.
Sarah I don't think really wanted to marry Charles. If she really wanted to marry him she would never ever have spoken to the press. She had come out of a disappointing relationship where a man did not propose to her when she started dating Charles. She said publicly that Charles was like a "big brother" to her a phrase that does not scream romance.
Charles it should be recalled had at least two young women turn him down. He was looking for a suitable wife so he could have the heir and spare. Diana filled the bill since he was looking for an attractive, blue blooded young woman who was fertile and had no past.
Double post auto-merged: September 15, 2014, 12:03:33 AM
Quote from: amabel on September 14, 2014, 09:23:39 PM
Quote from: TLLK on July 04, 2014, 11:34:39 PM
In hindsight it would have been better for Diana to have taken her mother's advice to heart and not marry Charles. Frances appeared to have a better understanding of the BRF's expectations in the early 1980's and more likely knew about Charles' feelings for Camilla. Charles should have not pursued someone with very different interests from his own. :(
I don't believe her mother made any real attempt to dissuade her.. what has been said sounds half hearted, "are you sure you're not marrying him because of who he is"... and as for charles, I believe that he thought that Di shared many of his interests. She claimed ot like country life, she seemed to enjoy Balmoral, She watched him shooting and IIRC playing polo. If Diana didn't share his interests why did she go out with him? She must have realised she didn't realy like country life, shooting etc, so why not turn down invites when she must have known that she didn't like the same tings?
Diana's mother had an authorized biography. Frances said that she had misgivings about Charles but never tried to talk to Diana frankly re these misgivings. She said it was "time" for Diana to get married and did not want to get involved.
Diana always watched Charles pay polo throughout the marriage even when they had their marital issues. She never pretended to like to shoot or ride. Everybody in the run up to the engagement knew Diana fell from the horse and did not like riding (this was in all the profiles about her pre wedding). She did watch Charles go fishing and stalking.
Charles did not marry Diana for her possible hunting or riding skills--he saw her as filling the bill as the blue blooded wife who could provide the heir and spare for him.
Quote from: TLLK on September 14, 2014, 10:24:37 PM
^^^Hadn't thought about it that way. I would have found it surprising for a P and P of Wales divorcing too so this could be taken by her as a sign that she'd always be married.
Yes it was, but it was she who chose to GET a divorce. She did fall in Love with an idealised Charles, and yes it was a factor that he was POW and could not get a divorce, but all the same, She was the one who in spite of knowing that the Princea and Princess of wales were NOT supposed to divorce, wanted out of the marriage. She said she didn't want to infliect the pain of divorce on her children, but she did do so. She then got involved with a married man who had kids, and wanted HIm to leave his wife and children for her...
Double post auto-merged: September 15, 2014, 06:09:19 AM
Quote from: cinrit on September 14, 2014, 10:49:23 PM
Quote from: Curryong on September 14, 2014, 10:03:48 PM
^^ I don't think the young Diana was in love with Charles in a 'gold-digger' type way, Cindy,
I don't think so, either, Curryong. But I think the fact that he was/is the Prince of Wales was quite head-turning.
Cindy
Yes of course it was. I think it blinded her to the fact that she and C did nto share many interests and that she wasn't really ready for the whole "royal routine" thing...
Diana was told to get a divorce by the Queen, she did not initiate it.
Hoare never confirmed or denied an affair took place. Diana said goodbye to him and he is still with his wife.
Charles inflicted pain on Diana and was not the ideal husband: preferring another woman to her and letting her know, being emotionally abusive to her, and ditching her after she gave birth to his heir and spare. Diana probably would not have wanted out if Charles met her halfway and dumped Camilla and stopped contacting her. And Diana did say publicly she did not want a divorce.
Charles did more than his share of inflicting pain.
If C and C had "many interests" then Charles should have stayed with her as her lover or forced a divorce of the PBs. Charles is no saint. He married Diana to get the heirs and did not want to risk his place in line of succession and apparently felt Camilla was not "good enough" to have royal children.
The key interest that Diana and Charles did not have in common was the presence of Camilla. She is the elephant in the room that some don't want to see.
Camilla is not the elephant in the room that some don't want to see. Everyone agrees that Camilla was the catalyst for the split between Charles and Diana. But she wasn't the only reason. And ultimately, if Diana didn't want a divorce (and I tend to believe she probably didn't), what did she think the Panorama interview was going to accomplish? The Queen let things go, hoping the Wales' could work things out, but when Diana went on international television and criticized her son, who is going to be the next monarch, she had no choice but to call a halt to it the best way she knew how, a divorce. The Panorama interview was the straw that broke the camel's back; it's what caused the divorce.
Cindy
So how come some keep saying the marriage would have broken up without Camilla around and keep talking about the two not having the same interests. Camilla is absolved. Penny Junor even preached in her Harry book that Camilla had nothing to do with the breakup. She does not want to see the elephant inthe room either.
The marriage was pretty far gone when Charles told his biographer he felt "pressured" to marry Diana. Diana wanted to give her side of the story. What Charles said to his biographer was a slap in the face to Diana. Charles went on international television too saying he cheated on his wife. And the next day his secretary said he cheated with Camilla.
I disagee that the Panorama interview alone caused the divorce. There was Charles blabbing to his biographer and forced the divorce of the PBs. Once Camilla was divorced Charles became pretty much obligated. I don't get why Charles Dimbleby book and interview are just glossed over. Charles did much damage with that interview.
has anyone read or looked at the Dimbley book or interview lately? I did - the video. It is not as shocking as the Panoram interview. The revelations while they may have been shocking at the time - are not as sensational as what the Panorama interview reveals - ie - self harm etc
Charles actually makes efforts in the Dimbley interview to say good things and to accept the blame for the marriages failure. He certainly doesn't imply Di was a bad mother or an unwilling PoW or any other such thing.
Diana I suspect did the panorama interview in part because her love letters to Hewitt were about to be released so she controlled how that info came out also I think - and her friends verify this - Diana was in that apartment - alone - kids away at school - much less charity work - and she would sit around going over all the wrongs done to her and the people she wanted to get even with - becoming obsessive so those obsessions and all that dwelling drove her to do the interview. And just as she later regretted doing the Morton book (she said this) I bet she regretted doing the panorama interview. She repeatedly said she did not want a divorce but the Panorama interview - which all of her advisors and friends were against - did her in. Diana could be impulsive and then regret later.
I read the Dimbleby book (re read it) and yes, I found it shocking. It was full of self pity and he had nothing good to say about his own parents and Diana. Diana confessed to Morton about the self harm she talked about the "rampant" bulimia to Bashir.
Charles never had anything good to say about Diana in his book, not even saying he was fond with her. And the ultimate insult was that he felt "forced" to marry her and preferred Camilla to Diana. It was not a harmless book since Charles confessions forced the PB divorce and Camilla's father asked Charles what was he going to do about Camilla now. Charles broke with royal tradition of not outing the mistress.
There were wrongs done to Diana. And she did accomplish things, she did not sit in her room she got out and about and actually received honors for her charity work. I think you forget the Anti Landmine Campaign, among other things.
Diana never said publicly she regretted the Morton book.
I think making Diana seem like the "bad person" in this is just wrong on many levels.
Charles did spend much time wallowing in self pity and it shows in the Dimbleby book and interviews. He even whined about how the boys in school were "mean" to him and remembers the time his parents missed his birthday party.
The Dimbleby book did not make Charles look good. It showed a petulant self pitier who blamed others for his own mistakes.
Quote from: cate1949 on September 16, 2014, 12:08:58 AM
has anyone read or looked at the Dimbley book or interview lately? I did - the video. It is not as shocking as the Panoram interview. The revelations while they may have been shocking at the time - are not as sensational as what the Panorama interview reveals - ie - self harm etc
Charles actually makes efforts in the Dimbley interview to say good things and to accept the blame for the marriages failure. He certainly doesn't imply Di was a bad mother or an unwilling PoW or any other such thing.
Diana I suspect did the panorama interview in part because her love letters to Hewitt were about to be released so she controlled how that info came out also I think - and her friends verify this - Diana was in that apartment - alone - kids away at school - much less charity work - and she would sit around going over all the wrongs done to her and the people she wanted to get even with - becoming obsessive so those obsessions and all that dwelling drove her to do the interview. And just as she later regretted doing the Morton book (she said this) I bet she regretted doing the panorama interview. She repeatedly said she did not want a divorce but the Panorama interview - which all of her advisors and friends were against - did her in. Diana could be impulsive and then regret later.
What a very sad existence for Diana. I'm sorry that she didn't heed the advice that was given to her regarding the Panorama interview.
I think the "sad existence " is very much exaggerated.
Charles had his friends leak stories about Diana hence Diana striking back with the Morton book. Then Charles had the DImbleby book.
Quote from: sandy on September 15, 2014, 11:42:19 PM
So how come some keep saying the marriage would have broken up without Camilla around and keep talking about the two not having the same interests. Camilla is absolved. Penny Junor even preached in her Harry book that Camilla had nothing to do with the breakup. She does not want to see the elephant inthe room either.
What people have said is that the marriage would have failed; not that the Waleses would have divorced. They may have continued to live together unhappily, or maybe separated. They simply didn't see eye-to-eye on enough things. That doesn't make either one of them a "bad" person, though they both did things that were "bad".
Quote from: sandyThe marriage was pretty far gone when Charles told his biographer he felt "pressured" to marry Diana. Diana wanted to give her side of the story. What Charles said to his biographer was a slap in the face to Diana. Charles went on international television too saying he cheated on his wife. And the next day his secretary said he cheated with Camilla.
The marriage was pretty much gone when Charles felt pressured to marry Diana, period.
Quote from: sandyI disagee that the Panorama interview alone caused the divorce. There was Charles blabbing to his biographer and forced the divorce of the PBs. Once Camilla was divorced Charles became pretty much obligated. I don't get why Charles Dimbleby book and interview are just glossed over. Charles did much damage with that interview.
I didn't say that the Panorama interview alone caused the divorce. I said it was the straw that broke the camel's back, meaning there were too many problems mounting up, and the Panorama interview was the final insult to the marriage. The difference between the Dimbleby interview and the Panorama interview is that Diana questioned Charles' ability to do the job he is destined to do. Charles did nothing similar to Diana. For the Queen, that was "the final straw".
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 12:28:05 AM
I read the Dimbleby book (re read it) and yes, I found it shocking. It was full of self pity and he had nothing good to say about his own parents and Diana.
Diana also didn't have many good things to say about her parents.
Cindy
If Charles felt "pressured" he should not have married her. I think he wanted the marriage so he'd get heirs and once again, blames other people for his decision to marry Diana.
Diana did not say Charles was incapable of being King. She said the "top job" would "put limits on him." Some journalists actually agree with her since Charles would not be able (or is not supposed to) speak out on issues when he gets to be King. These would be the "limits" on him.
Charles did something similar to Diana via his authorized biography and he still has people like Junor and his cousin Pamela Hicks who trash Diana. He has no intention of making his late ex non-negotiable. Charles had no kinds words for Diana via his authorized biography nor said anything like he had even been fond of her which certainly would be humiliating to her.
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 12:31:27 AM
I think the "sad existence " is very much exaggerated.
Charles had his friends leak stories about Diana hence Diana striking back with the Morton book. Then Charles had the DImbleby book.
We'll have to disagree on this one. The books that I've read and the videos show a woman living a very sad existence IMO.
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 02:22:30 AM
Diana did not say Charles was incapable of being King. She said the "top job" would "put limits on him." Some journalists actually agree with her since Charles would not be able (or is not supposed to) speak out on issues when he gets to be King. These would be the "limits" on him.
I didn't say that Diana claimed Charles was incapable of being King. I said that she questioned his ability to do the job. [/quote]
Cindy
She actually did not. Feeling "limited" by the role did not necessarily reflect on his ability to do the job.
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2014, 05:24:48 PM
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2014, 05:04:39 AM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 12:31:27 AM
I think the "sad existence " is very much exaggerated.
Charles had his friends leak stories about Diana hence Diana striking back with the Morton book. Then Charles had the DImbleby book.
We'll have to disagree on this one. The books that I've read and the videos show a woman living a very sad existence IMO.
I've read books and seen videos. She did have happy times in her life. She was not in misery for her whole life. It is a sign of being healthy that she was moving on.
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2014, 05:04:39 AM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 12:31:27 AM
I think the "sad existence " is very much exaggerated.
Charles had his friends leak stories about Diana hence Diana striking back with the Morton book. Then Charles had the DImbleby book.
We'll have to disagree on this one. The books that I've read and the videos show a woman living a very sad existence IMO.
Quote from: cinrit on September 16, 2014, 11:05:59 AM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 02:22:30 AM
Diana did not say Charles was incapable of being King. She said the "top job" would "put limits on him." Some journalists actually agree with her since Charles would not be able (or is not supposed to) speak out on issues when he gets to be King. These would be the "limits" on him.
I didn't say that Diana claimed Charles was incapable of being King. I said that she questioned his ability to do the job.
Cindy
[/quote]
they wouldn't have divorced if Di hadn't done the Morton book, wouldn't even have separated. They would have just gone on living separated lives with other lover's. The queen was extremely reluctant to allow a divorce and only went for it when it was obvious that both parties were sniping at each other and Diana was going for the kill, with her Panroma interview
^^ Agreed.
Cindy
Good points amabel.
Quote from: amabel on September 16, 2014, 05:42:25 PM
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2014, 05:04:39 AM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 12:31:27 AM
I think the "sad existence " is very much exaggerated.
Charles had his friends leak stories about Diana hence Diana striking back with the Morton book. Then Charles had the DImbleby book.
We'll have to disagree on this one. The books that I've read and the videos show a woman living a very sad existence IMO.
Quote from: cinrit on September 16, 2014, 11:05:59 AM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 02:22:30 AM
Diana did not say Charles was incapable of being King. She said the "top job" would "put limits on him." Some journalists actually agree with her since Charles would not be able (or is not supposed to) speak out on issues when he gets to be King. These would be the "limits" on him.
I didn't say that Diana claimed Charles was incapable of being King. I said that she questioned his ability to do the job.
Cindy
they wouldn't have divorced if Di hadn't done the Morton book, wouldn't even have separated. They would have just gone on living separated lives with other lover's. The queen was extremely reluctant to allow a divorce and only went for it when it was obvious that both parties were sniping at each other and Diana was going for the kill, with her Panroma interview
[/quote]
I disagree. Charles' pals were leaking nasty stories about Diana to the press. There was damage before the Morton book came out.
I don't think they could have led separate lives. Diana IMO wanted a real marriage not a sham one.
Camilla was already playing hostess for Charles and if Diana met someone she wanted to marry it would have made things worse for her to be locked in a sham marriage.
Before the Morton book came out Charles was putting down Diana in public. It would be difficult to put up with this sort of situation indefinitely. Diana as still young and having years of this would have probably been impossible.
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 05:24:04 PM
She actually did not. Feeling "limited" by the role did not necessarily reflect on his ability to do the job.
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2014, 05:24:48 PM
If you only quote 5 words out of 33 in the sentence, then you're right, it looks like she only said that it would limit him. If you look at the whole quote, she quite explicitly questioned his ability to perform the role of King:
QuoteAnd because I know the character I would think that the top job, as I call it, would bring enormous limitations to him, and I don't know whether he could adapt to that.
Source, BBC transript: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/diana/panorama.html
:thanks:I appreciate you sharing the link to the entire transcript of the interview. It's been a long time since it first aired and often times it is easy to forget what was actually said.
again I think there is a bit of amnesia going on here - the Panorama interview - impact was so great - it almost resulted in the head of the BBC being forced to resign. Here is a quote describing the impact of Diana's interview
It was one of the most extraordinary moments in television history - a programme which split the higher echelons of the BBC and threatened to severely damage the monarchy
There was no such shocking reaction to Charles interview - although at the time the interview did gain him sympathy and his perilously low popularity polling improved. Fact.
So Di's interview was considerably more damaging - no one claims that the Charles interview almost toppled the monarchy yet that claim is routinely made for the Di Panorama interview. The interview was so momentous that ten years later BBC did a special program on it how it happened etc.
So let's not pretend here. The weight of evidence is that Diana interview with Bashir was devastating to Charles and to the monarchy. No such claim has ever been made about the Dimbley interview nor has it ever been claimed that Charles interview did equal damage to Di's rep.
Diana was advised by all her friends not to do the Morton book - she did it anyway and then regretted it. Despite this she then did the Panorama interview. She later regretted having done that. She then went on to make secret tapes with a BBC cameraman she hired because she felt that Bashir had tricked her and the interview did not represent her real feelings. She is first obsessed with Camilla then leaves messages to be read after her death that Camilla is a smokescreen and that Charles really wants to marry Tiggy. On the so called secret tapes she dismisses Camilla and Tiggy and talks about Charles and the unhealthy influence Fawcett has on him. Up down up down constantly buffeted by her obsessive thoughts and impulses.
Diana's close friends universally admit she lied - routinely. Dr Michael Adler head of the national aids trust who spent many hours working with her said "she was an ill person" who had "no real center". Clive James who wrote that magnificent obituary for her and admitted he was hopelessly in love with her also said she was at best unstable and "when the squeeze was on she was a fruitcake on the rampage".
But despite all this - it is largely Diana's version of the story that has been believed - although she herself disparaged Morton's book and her interview with Bashir - although she changed her story - although she was known to be dishonest - but she gets believed. And dull Charles with his unsympathetic aristo friends and horrid looking mistress cum wife is disbelieved.
Nuts.
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2014, 05:04:39 AM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 12:31:27 AM
I think the "sad existence " is very much exaggerated.
Charles had his friends leak stories about Diana hence Diana striking back with the Morton book. Then Charles had the DImbleby book.
We'll have to disagree on this one. The books that I've read and the videos show a woman living a very sad existence IMO.
Diana did the Morton interview because Charles was leaking that she was being unfaithful while he lived his life with Camilla. The public war was started by Charles, Diana escalated it.
Diana's love letters to Hewitt were about to be released thus making it clear she too had been having affairs - Bshir claimed she did the Panorama interview to control how that info came out
The love letters were never released. Hewitt needed $$$ and wanted to sell them after Diana died and there were not takers. Though I do believe the Bashir interview was a pre-emptive strike against Hewitt doing more blabbing.
Affair should be singular because the letters referred to the affair with Hewitt.
Double post auto-merged: September 17, 2014, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: Adrienne on September 17, 2014, 12:58:47 AM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 05:24:04 PM
She actually did not. Feeling "limited" by the role did not necessarily reflect on his ability to do the job.
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2014, 05:24:48 PM
If you only quote 5 words out of 33 in the sentence, then you're right, it looks like she only said that it would limit him. If you look at the whole quote, she quite explicitly questioned his ability to perform the role of King:
QuoteAnd because I know the character I would think that the top job, as I call it, would bring enormous limitations to him, and I don't know whether he could adapt to that.
Source, BBC transript: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/diana/panorama.html
She never said he could not do it or was incompetent. She said it would "limit him" which does not mean he was incompetent.
Double post auto-merged: September 17, 2014, 02:27:51 PM
Quote from: cate1949 on September 17, 2014, 03:19:36 AM
again I think there is a bit of amnesia going on here - the Panorama interview - impact was so great - it almost resulted in the head of the BBC being forced to resign. Here is a quote describing the impact of Diana's interview
It was one of the most extraordinary moments in television history - a programme which split the higher echelons of the BBC and threatened to severely damage the monarchy
There was no such shocking reaction to Charles interview - although at the time the interview did gain him sympathy and his perilously low popularity polling improved. Fact.
So Di's interview was considerably more damaging - no one claims that the Charles interview almost toppled the monarchy yet that claim is routinely made for the Di Panorama interview. The interview was so momentous that ten years later BBC did a special program on it how it happened etc.
So let's not pretend here. The weight of evidence is that Diana interview with Bashir was devastating to Charles and to the monarchy. No such claim has ever been made about the Dimbley interview nor has it ever been claimed that Charles interview did equal damage to Di's rep.
Diana was advised by all her friends not to do the Morton book - she did it anyway and then regretted it. Despite this she then did the Panorama interview. She later regretted having done that. She then went on to make secret tapes with a BBC cameraman she hired because she felt that Bashir had tricked her and the interview did not represent her real feelings. She is first obsessed with Camilla then leaves messages to be read after her death that Camilla is a smokescreen and that Charles really wants to marry Tiggy. On the so called secret tapes she dismisses Camilla and Tiggy and talks about Charles and the unhealthy influence Fawcett has on him. Up down up down constantly buffeted by her obsessive thoughts and impulses.
Diana's close friends universally admit she lied - routinely. Dr Michael Adler head of the national aids trust who spent many hours working with her said "she was an ill person" who had "no real center". Clive James who wrote that magnificent obituary for her and admitted he was hopelessly in love with her also said she was at best unstable and "when the squeeze was on she was a fruitcake on the rampage".
But despite all this - it is largely Diana's version of the story that has been believed - although she herself disparaged Morton's book and her interview with Bashir - although she changed her story - although she was known to be dishonest - but she gets believed. And dull Charles with his unsympathetic aristo friends and horrid looking mistress cum wife is disbelieved.
Nuts.
There was indeed a shocking reaction. Charles was so critical of his parents that his siblings had to speak out against what he said. He and his siblings were not speaking to each other for a time over it.
APB did not want to stay in the marriage once Charles outed Camilla. There was no alternative for him but to divorce. Camilla was no longer the "safe" married friend and Charles became obligated (her father confronted him over his confessions).
If that is not "shocking" I don't know what is.
I think there is amnesia going on or whitewashing of the ramifications of Charles confessions.
He also as good as admitted he did not love Diana and felt "forced" to marry her.
It did not garner Charles sympathy. And by his confessing that he cheated on his wife he made people just focus on that and not on his work as POW.
Diana left no messages. The letters she had were confidential and she never wanted them released. The butler Burrell got hold of them and HE published them. SO it is not true what you are claiming.
Diana was "obsessed" by Camilla for good reason. She loathed Diana and by manipulation and scheming she got where she is today. Lets not start giving Camilla halos please.
I see Charles gets free passes once again.
Double post auto-merged: September 17, 2014, 02:58:00 PM
cate, So Diana was "known to be dishonest." What about the deceit of Charles? He had his friends provide safe houses so he could be with Camilla. And his deceit that Camilla was the "harmless" married "friend." Camilla also went to the Sun editor for ten years with her side of the story. Charles also lied to his servants about where he was so Diana would not suspect anything about Camilla.
What secret tapes? The Settelen tapes were broadcast and Diana did not make accusations against Fawcett et al to Settelen.
The letters did come out because the royals took Burrell to court and there was much damage during that trial and Burrell revealed the letters not Diana. Diana was dead at the time.
The Dimbleby book made Diana look bad. Have you read it cate? He never even said he was fond of her or "liked" her she came out looking bad, even in the index entries for Diana.
I never read anywhere about a "cameraman" that Diana made tapes with. I think the said "cameraman" would have put them on TV had they even existed.
The damaging testimony was in those letters that Burrell kept.
Diana's doctor and therapist who treated her and was qualified never said any such things.
Clive James and others want to get favors from Charles so a dead Diana was fair game and you cannot libel the dead. Convenient was it not that Diana can't defend herself.
Adler did not treat Diana and sounds like a vicious gossip.
I think Charles was the one with issues but of course to some he is a saint.
Diana never ever disparaged Morton's book or Bashir publicly. What she said privately is subject to speculation.
Charles buddies were leaking stories about her and some apparently choose to believe that she was "mentally ill" with no proof. I guess a mentally ill person is defined as someone who won't put up and shut up when her husband wants to keep another person in the marriage.
For all your quotes about Diana, you forget that Diana was admired by Nelson Mandela and Mother Theresa and others. That is nothing to sneeze at.
This is all Charles' propaganda and to make accusations of "madness" against a dead woman is truly offensive. IMO.
Quote from: cate1949 on September 17, 2014, 07:15:13 AM
Diana's love letters to Hewitt were about to be released thus making it clear she too had been having affairs - Bshir claimed she did the Panorama interview to control how that info came out
of course he will claim that. I think she didn't really have a clear plan what she was doing, except to "get her story out". I think that she could have denied or refused to talk about the rumours of affairs, she didn't HAVE to admit to Hewitt, but she may have reasoned that admitting to one, took the heat off questions about the others and that the public would forgive her having one lover...
As far as Diana saying Charles was unfit to be King, I would like to point out when Charles got criticized for speaking out on issues, media people (including even Penny Junor) did say what Diana did that the "top job" would limit his ability to speak out on issues. And Junor certainly would not say Charles was incompetent or unfit.
sandy, out of curiosity, what do you think Diana meant when she said "and I don't know whether he could adapt to that."?
Quote from: Limabeany on September 17, 2014, 04:06:09 AM
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2014, 05:04:39 AM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 12:31:27 AM
I think the "sad existence " is very much exaggerated.
Charles had his friends leak stories about Diana hence Diana striking back with the Morton book. Then Charles had the DImbleby book.
We'll have to disagree on this one. The books that I've read and the videos show a woman living a very sad existence IMO.
Diana did the Morton interview because Charles was leaking that she was being unfaithful while he lived his life with Camilla. The public war was started by Charles, Diana escalated it.
I don't remember any particular rumours that she was being unfaithful other than that it was increasingly obvious by 1991 or so that the marriage was not working out and there were stories in the papers of Dis' being very flirty with men rather publicly. I doubt if Charles's "side" was saying anything about her then.. since I am sure he wanted the least attention drawn ot their marital problems. People thinking that the marriage was a failure, and noticing if Di was having an affair would bring back notice to HIM and to the possibility that He was having an affair. She did Morton in a mixed up mood, partly wanting I think to get out of te marriage, partly wanting just to hit out at Charles and to indicate that he was indeed having an affair. however if she was determined to tell the trurht abut her marriage, she was NOT doing so In Morton since she insinuated that Charles was having an affair with Cam but not that she herself had had an affair with Hewitt . I think that as the stories of Charles possibly resuming his affair with Cam began to surface and the Gilbey tape and the Camillagate tape made it increasingly obvious that the marriage was on the rocks, Charles's friends DID start to put out stories that Diana was difficult, mad and unreliable...But DI was using the press herself to brief journalists to put out HER side of the story....
YES
many of us here have selective memory then. Now. Will always. :teehee:
It is so hard to stick to to FACTS here for some of us.
Pardon me for repeating the FACTS again.
AS far PC being pressured to marry, not quite. You look at in the eyes of normal people, us, our norm, and the times of PW, PH .
IT WAS time for PC to get married. If not then, when?
He knew this.
His world then was one in which there was not going to be some long W-K almost 10 years of dating, breaking up etc.
PC was at 30 or a bit over.
He had his women from Camilla, to starlets, to Lady's (titled) of the Kingdom, etc.
There was nothing wrong with that.
Sowing his wild oats, he did and he did it very well!!
He had to marry before there was too much age difference between him and suitable aristo women.
If not then, when?
When he was 35 and the bride would have been 20? How about him being 40 and the girl 20?
Some of say he should have wanted. Waited for what? Who?
Would some aristo girl of 20 have things in common with 40 year him , LOL!! If you think LDFS did not, oh boy, what aristo girl would have wanted that job. Some aristo girl born in in 1975 , 20 in 1995, oh boy , she would have wanited to marry him. LOL!! YES, you would have been getting into aristo girls born into the 1970's. Add, mummmm, those girls, even aristo ones born then, good chance they would have had "intimate " moments at 16, 17, OK!!!!!!
PC would have had his brother , #2, end married with kids before him. PC WNATED to get married and have his HEIRS . IT was time.
Our version of lovelove and his role and version of love and his world was different.
PD , and I believed, he loved her, despite even his words, no doubt PC REGRETS TODAY, did at the begininng.
What was at issue was NOT all the many things PC and PD had in common and they had a tons of things in common, not the age difference, and other things, BUT PD DID NOT WANT TO SHARE PC with Camilla.
Do you all really think if it had not been LDFS, but Lady somebody in 1985 lets say, Camilla would have been out of the picture? NO! NO ! NO!!!!!! The famous story fo the palace dance in which Camilla, the married Mrs. APB, sort of stated her claim there to boost PC's ego...to let little Miss Annable know who was going to there and "just to let her know..."
Camilla and PC carried on when she was married to PC .
I have said before, PD , hindsight now and it was not my life, but she could have handled it all differently if she would have had sisters to advise her, a mother, an aunt, a grandmother, a titled woman of The Kingdom, someone like that.
Let him have Camilla and she too embrace Camilla and do so in public and set it up to have them all three be together. Be for a while and it may have taken all 4 years after their wedding to restrain herself , but be Rose Kennedy like , ABOVE REPROACH and SAINTED . and through the scandal on him and Camilla. Expose them , but through her .
PD had the upper hand there all along but did not know how to play her hand.
YES, she did many wrong things. No doubt she regretted her big interviews and autobiography.
I give her a pass in that the girl was DESPARATE!!!! Lonely! Cheated! Felt used and like a stupid, silly, fool!!!! She was used and was a fool!! Camilla and PC played her for a fool from day 1.
Anyway, the main point YOU CAMILLA fans will not, EVER will say is that PC never gave her up and she never wanted to lose HER place in PC's life.
All this , they, PC and PD had nothing in common, PD's age, her issues adpating, without Camilla, they would have divorced anyway....it wa s abd marraige from the start because f this and that but YOU NEVER SAY CAMILLA was why and all the other dozen reasons you all say is total nonsense!!!!
If not LDFS, as I said, another woman would have had to deal with Camila and PC. Take it another girl would have dealt it better , got what she wanted in being PofW, etc. perhaps another titled girl, one who did not have PD's popularity, would have handled it better in one other way and could have done so easily. She would have had her affair with Lord/Duke or Lord X 's son or Duke X's son and PC and Camilla could have stayed forever as the P and his sidepiece.
I think sidepiece is so much a better term than mistress. Mistress is too good of a term for Camilla. Royal mistresses in all of PC's ancestors and all Royal houses KNEWtheir palce and got all they wanted in the place of privilege but NEVER upsurped the wife. NEVER!!!
I have said before, OMG, but U.S Mafiaoso's of the 1980's and back may have had the goomba/girflriends, but she was NEVER upsurped the wife, the Madonna. You know , that Madonna -Wh o re complex that some men have. Common, trashy, no good men do not have sidepiece upsurp the wife. WIFE is not upsurped by the sidepeice. No matter if these guys had lost all love, affection, even like the wife, lost feelings of like for her, etc. for the wife, still, the sidepiece did not upsurp the wife.
PD's happiness. Her sons brought her happiness. he work brought her happiness. That is all she had really.
All the money, fame, really, not much and I have said this before over and over. She never had a man to love her and call her his own. Some poor Council Housing , factory working woman in England has that!!!
PD had things like vacations with her kids to make her happy. She had some affairs, really only 2-3 that made her somewhat happy for a while until the heartbreak. Khan....ummm. Make that really only one affair with a man worthwhile and that was fine until reality set in , ended it and heartbreak. He NEVER wanted her as in being front and center and out in daylight with her.
LOL!!!
Really, tragic, PD did not have happy life overall in childhood and in her adult years. She was happy and got herself together and totally stopped fighting and gave up on PC and everything about a year , little over a year before she died.
Question.
Would any of you would have wanted to be PD? No.
For a day? No.
Is your life without being a multimillionaire and her fame, looks, etc. happier than hers? Yes.
PC and Camilla, it is is what it is. PD is long gone dead. PC is going to be K and Camilla will be Q. YES, they will be very much alive and will have a lot of time to do this in their lives. King Charles and Queen Camilla will live until their mid 80's at least. BF , Royals do not die like regular people. Lack of stress in life. Doctors round the clock , 24/7 at theoir disposal and all kinds of yearly tests . Insurance is not an issue, LOL, is not an issue for everything possible before anything occurs. Tests are given evne if not needed.
What I do not understand is that some of you NEVER say the truth based on the FACTS.
That is where I get lost in your posts and I think some others too.
PC and C, that is done. Old news. That is not my point.
I do not care. I do not that big of an interest innthem .Some of you act like do. My arguing stops at that point. The subjects are not personal to me. I do not live in these people's world. They are not known to me nor am I to them. Makes no difference in my life. I am not THAT interested in them. I do not even live in The UK. I think in my posts I have taken many criticisms at PD based on FACTS.You guys have no problems with that. Where is your criticism of PC and Camilla? None. Never!! It was alll PD's fault. Her affairs...Morton book, panorma...morning sickness... the marriage ended at the that day in July 1981,...etc.
The excuses some of you have are just silly.
Like sandy said, Camilla is halo worthy now by some of you? She is winning hearts the press and pr there is pushing. Like I have said many times, really it does not matter if the people favor her or not. Monarchy is not open for vote. The people of The UK and Commonwelath nations really do not matter in the grand scheme of things. TPTB, heads of states, European crowns, England's aristos/nobility/gentry are those who matter.
PC and C real lives of close family and friends and their legacy for her children, grandchildren matter.
That is what I do not understand about some of you guys.
QuoteI think in my posts I have taken many criticisms at PD based on FACTS.You guys have no problems with that. Where is your criticism of PC and Camilla? None. Never!! It was alll PD's fault. Her affairs...Morton book, panorma...morning sickness... the marriage ended at the that day in July 1981,...etc.
The FACTS are that EVERY SINGLE PERSON posting about Charles and Camilla have criticized them. We have all said that Charles did things wrong -- that he shouldn't have married Diana if he didn't love her, that he shouldn't have cheated on her, that he too used the press to his advantage, etc. We have all said that Camilla did thing wrong -- that she shouldn't have cheated on her husband, that she shouldn't have gotten involved with a married man.
No one thinks Charles and Camilla are saints. No one thinks they did nothing wrong. I sincerely do. not. understand. why we continue to be accused of this.
[mod] Gentle reminder for everyone to be kind to each other. If this thread gets too contentious, we can lock it. :flower: [/mod]
Well Canuck, maybe that is you and I KNOW it is me.
No, many, many of us continue to dig up PD this and so PC and Poor Cammy that....
I am long winded in my post sometimes but the FACT is PC and Camilla destroyed a young girls' hopes, dreams, total love for PC , home life she wanted and made a total fool and complete jackazz of her from the very beginning. THAT IS FACT.
All the in between things, anicent history. Pointless really. Pointless if we cannot discuss the FACTS. Really no reason to because it was done as it was , happened as it did all resulting into what is now and will be. Done deal!
I am trying to look at it from a different way.
She died and NO, she is not a candidate for catonization, LOL!!
PC and Camilla , K and Q to be have won it all. Really, CAMILLA WON IT ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PW and his life, PH and his life, crown jewels even wearing ones PD wore, she wears which I think is totally crass because there are no end to jewels. Why wear the same ones She wore. Camilla won the title, subjects who ahve no choice because Monarchy is not open to vote, great PR campaign to ease her into as time goes, her title of Queen Camilla and QEII and PP and the BRF attention and more. Everything else in between is really pointless.
Beginning was what it was. End is what it is. King C and Queen C..
Why knock a dead woman? Kind of pointless.
We have had rounds and rounds about this trio of ancient history. Some of us do like to erase one of the characters and make up new things.
When PW and K got married, we had long discussions about if PD were alive , where would she have sat? Some of us are so personal , weird I find by the way, with these people. They said PD would have sat away from BRF as she was not PC's wife.
Common sense is she and PC would have sat together and PD boyfriend,husband and Camilla would have sat at some other place close by.
Lady Adams , as far as shutting down, well,. I have not taken swipes at people.
I read the back and forth, same ole thing, and just have to questions, WHY? What is the point some here are trying to make? What is in it for you? Why the need to rewrite waht was FACT and what IS?
My personal thing about it all looking at my life wnad others, and I know you all know people too and have gone through things and that is some LIFE IS NOT FAIR.
CHOICES . We all have choices and then the results of the choices, good, bad, neutral, take over and lead.
Some people get it all no matter what good , bad, neutral they have done.
Some people, fate needs to shake them a break you wish at some point and I mean those who make good choices.
But then, LIFE IS NOT fair nor is it a fairytale. Grow up!!
The Camilla's , people like her, maybe they have it right. LOOK AT FOR #1. Be da nmed anything, anybody else. Keep your eyes on what you wnt, and LOOK OUT FOR #1. Self. it works from what I have seen of people I know.
What is in it for some of us here? Nothing!
QuoteI am long winded in my post sometimes but the FACT is PC and Camilla destroyed a young girls' hopes, dreams, total love for PC , home life she wanted and made a total fool and complete jackazz of her from the very beginning. THAT IS FACT.
FanDianaFancy, perhaps the disconnect is that we seem to have very different definitions of the word "fact".
That sentence I quoted, for example, is what I would call an opinion. Diana was very young when they married = fact. Charles cheated on Diana with Camilla = fact. But Diana had "total love" for Charles, Charles and Camilla made a fool of her from the very beginning of the marriage, it was Charles and Camilla who have sole responsibility for "destroying" everything = all opinions.
Everyone is welcome to their opinions, of course. But I think we all benefit (me too!) from remembering that they are just opinions -- we don't know these people, we weren't there for what happened, and we are all drawing our own conclusions based on various public sources of information.
Quote from: Adrienne on September 18, 2014, 04:09:15 AM
sandy, out of curiosity, what do you think Diana meant when she said "and I don't know whether he could adapt to that."?
Well Charles has gotten criticized (and praised as well) for speaking out on various issues, something he would be discouraged from doing as King. So this does put limits on him and this comment on the top job putting limits on him did come from people other than Diana. It does not say he would not be a good king but it does say it could cause frustration because Charles does like to speak out.
Double post auto-merged: September 18, 2014, 07:46:11 PM
Quote from: amabel on September 18, 2014, 04:53:07 AM
Quote from: Limabeany on September 17, 2014, 04:06:09 AM
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2014, 05:04:39 AM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2014, 12:31:27 AM
I think the "sad existence " is very much exaggerated.
Charles had his friends leak stories about Diana hence Diana striking back with the Morton book. Then Charles had the DImbleby book.
We'll have to disagree on this one. The books that I've read and the videos show a woman living a very sad existence IMO.
Diana did the Morton interview because Charles was leaking that she was being unfaithful while he lived his life with Camilla. The public war was started by Charles, Diana escalated it.
I don't remember any particular rumours that she was being unfaithful other than that it was increasingly obvious by 1991 or so that the marriage was not working out and there were stories in the papers of Dis' being very flirty with men rather publicly. I doubt if Charles's "side" was saying anything about her then.. since I am sure he wanted the least attention drawn ot their marital problems. People thinking that the marriage was a failure, and noticing if Di was having an affair would bring back notice to HIM and to the possibility that He was having an affair. She did Morton in a mixed up mood, partly wanting I think to get out of te marriage, partly wanting just to hit out at Charles and to indicate that he was indeed having an affair. however if she was determined to tell the trurht abut her marriage, she was NOT doing so In Morton since she insinuated that Charles was having an affair with Cam but not that she herself had had an affair with Hewitt . I think that as the stories of Charles possibly resuming his affair with Cam began to surface and the Gilbey tape and the Camillagate tape made it increasingly obvious that the marriage was on the rocks, Charles's friends DID start to put out stories that Diana was difficult, mad and unreliable...But DI was using the press herself to brief journalists to put out HER side of the story....
I never saw stories about Diana being "flirty" with other men in 1991.
What did come out in 1991 (and ca. 1990) was that they did spend more time apart than together.
Charles side was putting out stories as early as 1985 (ca. the time of Tina Brown's article the Mouse that Roared). A woman called the newspapers and leaked the story that Diana refused a 30th birthday party that Charles wanted to throw for her--one of Charles people no doubt.
The Sun Editor said that Mrs Parker Bowles rang him up for ten years beginning as early as ca. 1982.
Quote from: Canuck on September 18, 2014, 03:58:40 PM
QuoteI am long winded in my post sometimes but the FACT is PC and Camilla destroyed a young girls' hopes, dreams, total love for PC , home life she wanted and made a total fool and complete jackazz of her from the very beginning. THAT IS FACT.
FanDianaFancy, perhaps the disconnect is that we seem to have very different definitions of the word "fact".
That sentence I quoted, for example, is what I would call an opinion. Diana was very young when they married = fact. Charles cheated on Diana with Camilla = fact. But Diana had "total love" for Charles, Charles and Camilla made a fool of her from the very beginning of the marriage, it was Charles and Camilla who have sole responsibility for "destroying" everything = all opinions.
Everyone is welcome to their opinions, of course. But I think we all benefit (me too!) from remembering that they are just opinions -- we don't know these people, we weren't there for what happened, and we are all drawing our own conclusions based on various public sources of information.
Well she said he loved him so I will take that , her word about herself , as FACT.
It was said by many BRF legit authors via people in the know, etc. that she loved him so I will take it as FACT.
PD's own words, I will take as FACT.
Since I am not her, did not live her life, was not in her head, nor PC, nor's C, I WILL TAKE WHAT THEY ALL HAVE SAID AS FACT about themselves. They should know themselves better than we all do, LOL!!
I think PD, PC, and C should know the who, what, where, when of their thoughts, etc. better than any of us. FACT!
PD said she 50% of the fault of the failure of HER marriage. It was not MY marriage . I was not married to her, PC , CPB, nor APB so I would take PD's WORD AS FACT about herself and her marriage.
Since she did not marry herself and PC was the person she married and CPB was 1/3 of the marriage, I think it is FACT to say and mathematical logical to place 50% of the blame of THEIR marriage on PC. A marriage is made up of 2 people. CPB as #1 girlfriend with PC and PC still seeing Kanga was and who else, is FACT!!!
It is fact that these two , Fred and Gladys , knew of their plans before PC selcted PD and after and during HIS marriage and etc. so YES, FACT, these two people destroyed a THEN young's innocent girl's dreams, hopes, love for PC, etc.
Fred and Gladys went on the honeymoon with their parting little gifts of a private joke between the two of them just for lovers to know and PD really tagged along. Gladys was there in spirit. That seems a pretty bad way to start off a marriage .
There were times in pics we saw and PC and PD looked and so it was said by those in the know, ok. I will EVEN give PC credit , as I posted before, that despite his last interview at that time when he and PD were so bitter and angry towards each other, the he really did not mean he never loved her. I think he did he enough, but the child-woman grew up and wanted him and not CPB. FACT!!!! Common sense, if PD had not mind CPB, she and PC would still be married today. Many women are, were in that world Rose Kennedy like and are very tolerable. Turning their heads is how they cope.
What I have posted are FACTS per their own words!!!! Like it or not, likeI said, I was not married to them but I will take their word about themselves as FACT!!! I did not give an interview to Morton(book) or Panorama or Dimbley. I did not tell PC and PD what to say, do.
Perhaps that is another difference in our approach. I don't think everything said by Diana, or Charles, or Camilla, is necessarily fact. Particularly since there is more than one example of them not being honest (like Diana denying she had helped with the Morton book, or Charles denying the affair with Camilla for many years).
Correction , my mistake....and pardon my bad typos. CORRECTIONS ----2 CORRECTIONS_________2
*There were pics when PD and PC looked happy and it was reported so they were. Ex. Their visit to The White House under Reagon and that iconic dress and dance with John Travolta and everyone else looking on.PD's ballet dance she did to impress PC. The time she smashed his head with a fake bottle at some studio. the time she told some reporters something funny it was ... that her husband liked her hair blond. Their Australian tour. Surely the birth of their sons. Ok. I assume, assuming here, NOT FACT, but I will go and give them both credit that they were happy with each other at some very few times until it all turned bad and it turned bad rather qucikly.
My mistake....
**CORRECTION with my bad typos, NO, if CPB had not been there and invited in, would PD and PC still been married?
I do not know that since I am not them and I do not have a crystal ball, LOL!!!
_____________ I made two errors here. Typos..... Sorry. CORRECTIONS.............................
Double post auto-merged: September 18, 2014, 10:43:26 PM
Quote from: Canuck on September 18, 2014, 09:56:37 PM
Perhaps that is another difference in our approach. I don't think everything said by Diana, or Charles, or Camilla, is necessarily fact. Particularly since there is more than one example of them not being honest (like Diana denying she had helped with the Morton book, or Charles denying the affair with Camilla for many years).
Well if we can pick and choose what they said about their lives and they ought to know as not fact FACT about their lives, then everything is subject to everyone's opinions. That does not make much sense. What PC says about CPB now? Is that FACT? Is what PW says about PK FACT? IS what PW says about PK's parents FACT? Can pictures be taken as FACT? The two early pics of LDS and CPB said alot in the late 1980's.
YES, they said or not said then, the things you listed, but there were reasons why. Truth came out . FACT!!!
Truth came out later , after she died, YES, she ghost wrote her own autobiography. She could not say she was writing her autobiography. He could not day , places , times he hooked up with CPB. The pics of LDFS looking casted down like a scolded schoolgirl by the headmistress , CPB says a lot. Nothing to the general public then, but ah-ha! Pieces fit. Actually, CPB was the headmistress and LDFS was the shoolgirl then. LOL!!!
YES, PC could not say when he and CPB really stopped , started their relationship. FACT it is known they never really stopped being extremely , too close in their friendship even after she got married and after he got married many years later. FACT , CPB was THERE in pics during PC and PD's courthships. The Fred and Gladys gift.
I would like, like some of us her do, to rewrite the story my way, but it is not my story/life to write or rewrite. It is FACT and already written by those whoose life it is for PC and CPB was in PD's case.
Once gain , I will take as FACT what was and is now . It is what it was. It is what it is.
Disconnect. New code word. I hear that a lot on my job. It is waht it is . New code phrase . Rude.For lack of a better one, it works. My supervisor used that and said she strongly disliked that phrase, but the situation of losing a key person in personnel due to higher ups transferring her, was what it was.
Nothing we can do about it.
Quote from: Canuck on September 18, 2014, 09:56:37 PM
Perhaps that is another difference in our approach. I don't think everything said by Diana, or Charles, or Camilla, is necessarily fact. Particularly since there is more than one example of them not being honest (like Diana denying she had helped with the Morton book, or Charles denying the affair with Camilla for many years).
Why would they tell the tturth? Of course Charles was not going to speak of his affair with Camilla, until really pushed and Di was hardly likely to admit she'd done anything as dangerous as the Morton book
Charles did speak out on the affair. He did not have to. Morton never named Camilla as the "lover" of Charles and the Royal Family even supported APB and CPB as a married couple receiving them in the royal enclosure at Ascot. Plus Charles had his friends say C and C were "just friends.
Quote from: Canuck on September 18, 2014, 01:49:44 PM
QuoteI think in my posts I have taken many criticisms at PD based on FACTS.You guys have no problems with that. Where is your criticism of PC and Camilla? None. Never!! It was alll PD's fault. Her affairs...Morton book, panorma...morning sickness... the marriage ended at the that day in July 1981,...etc.
The FACTS are that EVERY SINGLE PERSON posting about Charles and Camilla have criticized them. We have all said that Charles did things wrong -- that he shouldn't have married Diana if he didn't love her, that he shouldn't have cheated on her, that he too used the press to his advantage, etc. We have all said that Camilla did thing wrong -- that she shouldn't have cheated on her husband, that she shouldn't have gotten involved with a married man.
No one thinks Charles and Camilla are saints. No one thinks they did nothing wrong. I sincerely do. not. understand. why we continue to be accused of this.
they were all 3 in a difficult situation. had they been 3 ordinary people (ro 4 if you count Andrew PB) there probably would have been divorces earlier.. Charles sand Di would have realised their incompatibility, she might have left him with the kids. Maybe they would have split up before they Had kids. Andrew PB would not have felt obliged to stay married to Cam, when he Had another lady he wanted to marry, out of loyalty to his wife. Charles would have settled with Camilla, and Di would have been free to find another husband.. but they weren't supposed to split up, so she and he stayed together and tried to make their marriage work in public. Things didn't work out well, and the problems gradually became apparent tot the public. and both of them Had the media trying ot ferret out stories of their problems and whether they were seeing other people. but I think what choice did they have? They were young it seems to me very unfair to condemn them to a life of celibacy, when they were not getting on well and probably the physical side of their marriage wasn't working well.
The physical side of marriage should not be the only thing to maintain a marriage. There is love, respect, and even "liking" the other person. Charles was supposed to teach the young wife about the physical side of love but Charles IMO could not be bothered.
Well, they had two children together, so he was bothered at least twice.
Cindy
i think they had a normal sex life for some time. I don't really buy that Charles was so uninterested in his wife physically as Di made out both before and after marriage. In fact some people who saw them did notice that he seemed to be very attracted ot her and that he touched her a lot during the first years of marriage.. so I think that her stories that he was so "cold" and un tactile physically before and after marriage are probably just D's stories. but probably it was not THAT big a part of their marriage as time passed and Di felt inferior to Cam because she had no premarital experience. I think that her bulimia began to put him off and their lack of communication on other levels affected their physical relationship..
Keeping to the thread concerning Camilla winning hearts I would like to say this. Camilla does not have to win everybody's heart. She may not have won the hearts of some of the people on this board. However "it looks as if the final hurdle has been surmounted, too, with the latest YouGov poll showing that a majority of Britons now support her becoming Queen Consort, if her husband succeeds his mother."
It is the British public, whose Queen Consort she will become, that are having their hearts won. Perhaps it is because they appreciate the way she has done her job, kept her mouth shut, been kind, warm and friendly to people and has handled herself well. Perhaps the British people, who are the ones who matter where this is concerned prefer to look forward than look back. She is here to stay. Perhaps, like most of the people on this board believe, no one alone is to blame for what happened in the marriage of Charles and Diana. No one is blaming Camilla alone or Charles alone or Diana alone for the disgraceful mess of unroyal behavior that caused the enormous scandal. However, it is long over. Time moves on and the British people seem to be moving with it. Maybe they just don't much care or pay that much attention to the whole matter.
Quote from: amabel on September 21, 2014, 07:04:20 AM
i think they had a normal sex life for some time. I don't really buy that Charles was so uninterested in his wife physically as Di made out both before and after marriage. In fact some people who saw them did notice that he seemed to be very attracted ot her and that he touched her a lot during the first years of marriage.. so I think that her stories that he was so "cold" and un tactile physically before and after marriage are probably just D's stories. but probably it was not THAT big a part of their marriage as time passed and Di felt inferior to Cam because she had no premarital experience. I think that her bulimia began to put him off and their lack of communication on other levels affected their physical relationship..
Marriage is supposed to be in sickness and in health. What if Charles had some digestive problem and was throwing up. Should Diana have been disgusted?
It shows that Charles did not love her in the first place IMO.
^^ Not that it has anything to do with Camilla winning our hearts, but there's a world of difference between a temporary stomach problem and bulimia.
Cindy
Quote from: lilibet80 on September 21, 2014, 01:11:46 PM
Keeping to the thread concerning Camilla winning hearts I would like to say this. Camilla does not have to win everybody's heart. She may not have won the hearts of some of the people on this board. However "it looks as if the final hurdle has been surmounted, too, with the latest YouGov poll showing that a majority of Britons now support her becoming Queen Consort, if her husband succeeds his mother."
It is the British public, whose Queen Consort she will become, that are having their hearts won. Perhaps it is because they appreciate the way she has done her job, kept her mouth shut, been kind, warm and friendly to people and has handled herself well. Perhaps the British people, who are the ones who matter where this is concerned prefer to look forward than look back. She is here to stay. Perhaps, like most of the people on this board believe, no one alone is to blame for what happened in the marriage of Charles and Diana. No one is blaming Camilla alone or Charles alone or Diana alone for the disgraceful mess of unroyal behavior that caused the enormous scandal. However, it is long over. Time moves on and the British people seem to be moving with it. Maybe they just don't much care or pay that much attention to the whole matter.
:goodpost: :notworthy: Outstanding post.
Quote from: cinrit on September 20, 2014, 10:31:20 PM
Well, they had two children together, so he was bothered at least twice.
Cindy
It is a FACT, he did his duty 2x. LOL YES, cindycinrit, but , so it was said after that 2nd heir was produced the job was done and done well. The marriage was over and out. Finished . Done. Show was over. No need to continue pretending after that. The questions is really "when?"
Double post auto-merged: September 21, 2014, 03:00:32 PM
Quote from: sandy on September 20, 2014, 09:44:23 PM
The physical side of marriage should not be the only thing to maintain a marriage. There is love, respect, and even "liking" the other person. Charles was supposed to teach the young wife about the physical side of love but Charles IMO could not be bothered.
Well said.
This is starting to get hilarious! Are we now in their beds discussing their sex lives? Why not start a thread on how bad Charles was to Diana in bed in 1987 and how he SHOULD have behaved.
QuoteNo one thinks Charles and Camilla are saints. No one thinks they did nothing wrong. I sincerely do. not. understand. why we continue to be accused of this.
Quote.. Charles sand Di would have realised their incompatibility, she might have left him with the kids.
I know, my opinion, yours, hers, and everyones here. I agree with you on everything. This though, nah. PD would not have given up her kids to PC, with her having half custody or visitation. NEVER!!! She would not have LEFT them as she felt she was LEFT by her mother and the rank and file and world of the nobility/aristos had it that way as well in that day and time. The children belonged to the Earl of Spencer and the Estate of the Spencer line, etc. That was a sticking point in PC and PD really bad last years in that she took a lot and ate up a lot bitterness she was powerless in getting for herslf, but HER SONS was not one of those things. She was not going to be upsurped by anyone, QEII, nobilitymonarchy world, PC, TPTB, TiggyLB, etc. when it came to HER being MOTHER to HER children. HOWEVER, in their world, the boys were off at borading school , the 3rd parent so to speak, so really PC and PD each had a 1/3 custody time with the boys.
Quote from: lilibet80 on September 21, 2014, 03:09:15 PM
This is starting to get hilarious! Are we now in their beds discussing their sex lives? Why not start a thread on how bad Charles was to Diana in bed in 1987 and how he SHOULD have behaved.
perhaps he was, or pehrpas she was?
Double post auto-merged: September 21, 2014, 07:54:22 PM
Quote from: lilibet80 on September 21, 2014, 01:11:46 PM
Keeping to the thread concerning Camilla winning hearts I would like to say this. Camilla does not have to win everybody's heart. She may not have won the hearts of some of the people on this board. It is the British public, whose Queen Consort she will become, that are having their hearts won. Perhaps it is because they appreciate the way she has done her job, kept her mouth shut, been kind, warm and friendly to people and has handled herself well..
I wouldn't say that they care or don't care. it just isn't such a big issue as people seem to feel on this forum/ People don't obsess about the RF or Diana so much as people here seem to. They just accept them if they are doing a modest amount of work and keeping out of scandals. if there have been scandals in the past then usually the people involved live it down, if they keep their heads down, go on working and keep on carrying on... Cam is mildly liked now, I think after being hated, and Diana still has fans but the grief over her death etc is long since gone. It didn't really last all that long. Its hardly a major thing, in that many marriages end in divorce, and people marry their lovers who have had affairs with them..and they get on with life.. so the attitude is that if that happened with Charles and Cam, so what? its no more than many people experience..
Well said, amabel!
CPB will never win the hearts of all her subjects. PD did win the hearts of all her subjects.
Life goes on and is for the living and these living people of the BRF are living a grand life!!!
CPB WILL BE QUEEN CAMILLA. It is not open for vote by the people , her subjects, and they can nothing about that NOR DO THEY really MATTER in the grand scheme of things.
Enough people, subjects of CPB, like her. PR campaign has been out in full swing for a while now in preparation for that day.
It is done!!! Been done!!!!! The day PC adn CPB married, it was done!!!
BRF , from I get of reading these boards, reading real newspapers about them mand the people, it is like amabel said there.
PD is still and always will mentioned with PC and CPB no matter what happens. When PC dies as KC. When CPB dies as QC. When PC and CPB are ceremonially named K and Q. When PH marries. When PH has children. When PW and K leave the hospital with the new baby boy or girl. . The name of the new baby, esp. if a girl.
As their children grow and KC and QC are their at their lifes' milestones, PD will still be brought up in the media , etc.
Even when the BRF consist on the BuckBalcony and walks to Christmas church means KC , QC and THEIR KIDS: PW, PH, PB and Lady Lopes and their families, PD will still be a ghost around written on and old pics brought out.
It is just the way it is.
Despite some people here think, people nin TUK, some media, people born way after PD's death, etc. PD is not going to vainish from history. PW and PH did not fall out the sky via delievered by the flying stork or was found floating down the River Thames in a basket and the lonely PC found them and called them his sons.
Scotland voted majority to stay part of TUK. Under the monarchy. I hardly think Scotland needs the protection of the crown for invasion against the Vikings stuff like that. No, I do know the whole story , pros and cons, of staying the TUK and under the monarchy. QEII was very concerned and urged her people to reconsider and things. see dailymail.com.
Quote from: cinrit on September 21, 2014, 02:31:36 PM
^^ Not that it has anything to do with Camilla winning our hearts, but there's a world of difference between a temporary stomach problem and bulimia.
Cindy
Some digestive problems may be chronic. I did not say the hypothetical problem was "temporary." You used the word temporary I did not.
And BTW, Diana did get her bulimia under control so the symptoms were under control thanks to help from a therapist.
Quote from: lilibet80 on September 21, 2014, 03:09:15 PM
This is starting to get hilarious! Are we now in their beds discussing their sex lives? Why not start a thread on how bad Charles was to Diana in bed in 1987 and how he SHOULD have behaved.
Lillibe it is nice to see you again? Hope youre' well.
Double post auto-merged: September 22, 2014, 05:27:12 AM
Quote from: cinrit on September 21, 2014, 02:31:36 PM
^^ Not that it has anything to do with Camilla winning our hearts, but there's a world of difference between a temporary stomach problem and bulimia.
Cindy
I think it was an issue, but not the oly one, in the marriage. I don't suppose it helped their sex life, but I think that the failure there was more to do with their Lack of companionship outside the bedroom which made things more difficult once the first flush Had worn off of sexual attraction. If Di was continually ill with her bulimia, its hard to see how a man would feel it was a good idea to press his attentions. In fact James Hewitt sad he found the bulimia repulsive when Di told him about it. And as time passed, I think Charles and di just got on so badly that the physical side of heir relationship reflected that, and fizzled out.
I think Cam will be Queen Consort because otherwise she will not be equal to all the other Queen consorts in Europe - not the only reason but an issue -
Quote from: amabel on September 22, 2014, 05:23:27 AM
Quote from: lilibet80 on September 21, 2014, 03:09:15 PM
This is starting to get hilarious! Are we now in their beds discussing their sex lives? Why not start a thread on how bad Charles was to Diana in bed in 1987 and how he SHOULD have behaved.
Lillibe it is nice to see you again? Hope youre' well.
Double post auto-merged: September 22, 2014, 05:27:12 AM
Quote from: cinrit on September 21, 2014, 02:31:36 PM
^^ Not that it has anything to do with Camilla winning our hearts, but there's a world of difference between a temporary stomach problem and bulimia.
Cindy
I think it was an issue, but not the oly one, in the marriage. I don't suppose it helped their sex life, but I think that the failure there was more to do with their Lack of companionship outside the bedroom which made things more difficult once the first flush Had worn off of sexual attraction. If Di was continually ill with her bulimia, its hard to see how a man would feel it was a good idea to press his attentions. In fact James Hewitt sad he found the bulimia repulsive when Di told him about it. And as time passed, I think Charles and di just got on so badly that the physical side of heir relationship reflected that, and fizzled out.
Having another woman lurking about does not give incentive for the husband to work on the marriage.
Hewitt never called it "repulsive" and the symptoms of Bulimia eased when she was with him. He did not have the attitude Charles had which was to make fun of it.
Marriage is supposed to be in sickness and in health. Bulimia gave Charles another excuse to ditch Diana. Again what if he had something like bulimia? would it be "OK" for Diana not to "press her attentions?"
Quote from: cate1949 on September 22, 2014, 05:33:26 AM
I think Cam will be Queen Consort because otherwise she will not be equal to all the other Queen consorts in Europe - not the only reason but an issue -
My understanding is that whatever the title they're all treated as equals if they are the spouse of the monarch. Lalla Salma doesn't have the title of queen but she's still treated the same as Rania, Letizia, Mathilde etc...Daniel will be given the same courtesies as well when Victoria ascends to the throne.
According to the Dutch constitution Maxima should have kept her original title when W-A began his reign, but the government opted to allow her to use the title of Queen.
the wife of the King, in the UK, is queen. Camilla will almost certainly be known as quene
cate says it better thatn I have said it over and over.
Camilla, the Rotweiller will be Queen Camllia.
Princess Camilla married to King Charles is silly, not appropriate, lacks status and rank in the world of the Brit nobility/aristos who are her subjects yet, peers to a point, and YES, in the eyes of the world to heads of state, crowned heads of Europe, Camilla will be known as Queen Camilla and nothing else.
Period!!
Double post auto-merged: September 23, 2014, 10:59:49 PM
Consort formally.
yes it is highy likely that she will be known as queen.
I was very scathing of her years ago, but you grow up. Diana was not the innocent she portrayed herself to be. She also used the media she also was unfaithful. it was a doomed marriage he because he had not got over Camilla, she because she wouldn't take advise and was just too young. That horrible wedding dress was the sort of thing a child would chose not an adult. Its past time that Camilla be known as what she is Princess of Wales, Diana wasn't the first nor will she be the last so stop acting as if it was only hers.
Double post auto-merged: September 24, 2014, 01:54:48 PM
Quote from: Windsor on July 03, 2014, 02:46:32 PM
The more I got to know about her, the more I saw her, and the closer I followed her activities. I slowly realised how truly wrong we all were, and how the Duchess was truly a victim of a very spiteful media.
The article posted at the start of this thread isn't a propaganda article at all, it is however an accurate description of how many people have been charmed by the Duchess. I relate very well to the words expressed in the article, as I am one of those people who have gone from disliking her, to actually enjoying her presence, and role within the Monarchy. I look forward to her one day being Crowned Queen alongside the Prince of Wales!
Same here and Diana trashing Charles in the interview that ended her marriage.
Diana was 19 when engaged I don't think the dress was "horrible." Charles even said "you look wonderful" when she walked to his side after her procession down the aisle.
Charles' trashing Diana via Dimbleby was also a factor. But of course that is ignored. He called her out literally as a broodmare that he was forced to marry.
I know people go on about the excuses made for Diana. I see a barrel full of excuses made for Charles.
Both sides have made excuses for Diana, Camilla and Charles.
I do notice Dimbleby is sort of brushed aside by some as "nothing." And it had various serious ramifications including the divorce of the PBs
Quote from: TLLK on September 24, 2014, 03:29:48 PM
Both sides have made excuses for Diana, Camilla and Charles.
well surprise surprise they were all human. They had their faults and their good points. They did stupid things and made mistakes. Most people do, and make problems for themselves. But it seems that every time Charles and Cam's names come up people have to recall their mistakes and follies, so while there are excuses for the things Diana did, that were wrong or foolish, IMO there are excuses for the things that C and Cam did. they were all 3 in a difficult position, and they didn't' chose the best way out of it...
Charles and Camilla put everyone in a difficult position the moment he asked her to give her opinion of Diana before he married her. Let's not spread the blame so equitably on everyone else.
Quote from: Limabeany on September 24, 2014, 04:31:23 PM
Charles and Camilla put everyone in a difficult position the moment he asked her to give her opinion of Diana before he married her. Let's not spread the blame so equitably on everyone else.
How is his asking someone for advice in whether she thinks his new girlfriend is suitable "putting everyone in a difficult position?" OK many men would not do such a thing. Some men DO ask old girlfriends for romantic advice...
Do you really think that Charles could not make up his own mind about marrying Diana? According to some friends, they advised Against his marrying Di on the grounds that she was too young for him and not up ot the role of Princess or his wife but he clearly ignored them. People do what they want to do and rarely listen to advice except when it is what they want to do themselves.
But Camilla was not just an "old girlfriend." Charles began another affair with her ca. 1979. Very close to the time he courted Diana.
One friend Penny Romsey advised against it. According to various biographers his other friends were for it including Camilla who even played hostess as the "safe" married friend for Charles and Diana.
I do think overall Charles married Diana to get heirs. He thought she would be compliant about being "civilized" like APB was.
I agree with sandy, her last sentence there.
"I do think overall Charles married Diana to get heirs. He thought she would be compliant about being "civilized" like APB was"
LDFS came from mthe nobility and knew the deal, but really was young, sheltered, in love, and caught between two worlds in opinion in the world of her rank in life and the new ways of the early 1980's. mShe thought and wanted love, a husband, a home, a family...jsut them. No others in the marriage or on the side and no divorce.
amabel, I am not being critcal of you.
PC was ready for marriage when he started really looking and chose LDFS . He chose her along with advice from his closest advisors, etc. She was vetted so to speak. So it was said CPB was part of that adviosry group.
Our world and relatiy is not like these people.
PC needed heirs from his line. He was heir. It was simply time.
CPB was not simply an old friend and former girlfriend. She and PC cont. their affair on/off between her pregnancies. He also was dating starlets, suitable titled girls of his kingdom, and other side dishes like Kanga.
Once gain LDFS being too young is a nice hindsight thought. Rumor has it his friends thought she was too young...I wonder if that was true. Of course it is hindsight now to say what would have been if he had waited. No one had a crystal ball to foretell the future of what the 1980's was going to be like and what the pool of girls who went through the 1980s as teens would have been like. Now, we can, oh my. PC really would have faced very slim pickings had he waited to go through the 1980's or even up to 1985 for the princess.
He HAD to find a suitable wife material. PAndrew was coming up the rear sooner or later as he was old enough. Even PEd coming up on 21 soon could have, was old enough almost to marry and start a family post 1983.
The girls, I mean WOMEN, were not going to get older and be without a scandalous past .
They were all younger than he was. The girls were really only going to get younger. LDS went through the 1970's as a teenager. The next pool of titled girls would have gone through the their teen years in the 1980s' , LOL!!!!! Good luck it would have been finding even a girl from the aristos/nobility wihtout a past to come present from that pool. It would have good luck finding a girl from that aged pool who would have wanted to be saddled with an old man, PC. Ewwwwww. 1980's getting married at 20 and start having babies 12 mnths after? A 1980's girl? Nah!!!!!! What about college? Career? I mean aristo girls too. They too went throught eh greedy Everything Goes 1980. 1980's was really a different world. She would have much younger too., About her 20 to his 36 to her 20.
YES, PC had choice but also he his life was kind of set in the choices.
Quote from: PaulaB on September 24, 2014, 01:50:03 PM
I was very scathing of her years ago, but you grow up. Diana was not the innocent she portrayed herself to be. She also used the media she also was unfaithful. it was a doomed marriage he because he had not got over Camilla, she because she wouldn't take advise and was just too young. That horrible wedding dress was the sort of thing a child would chose not an adult
No she wasn't an innocent, and she did use the media, However, Charles's side also uesed the media against her... They were both unfaithful, they were both at fault in the sniping and arguing that went on at the last years of their marriage. As for her dress, I think that while now at a distance it may seem OTT, it was a beautiful "fairy tale princess" dress which fitted her image and which suited the very large cathedral she was married in. And she was very young when she married C, why hold her wedding dress taste at 19 against her?
[mod]
Quote fixed :flower:[/mod]
Quote from: amabel on September 24, 2014, 04:35:09 PM
Quote from: Limabeany on September 24, 2014, 04:31:23 PM
Charles and Camilla put everyone in a difficult position the moment he asked her to give her opinion of Diana before he married her. Let's not spread the blame so equitably on everyone else.
How is his asking someone for advice in whether she thinks his new girlfriend is suitable "putting everyone in a difficult position?" OK many men would not do such a thing. Some men DO ask old girlfriends for romantic advice...
Do you really think that Charles could not make up his own mind about marrying Diana? According to some friends, they advised Against his marrying Di on the grounds that she was too young for him and not up ot the role of Princess or his wife but he clearly ignored them. People do what they want to do and rarely listen to advice except when it is what they want to do themselves.
Sometimes I read about Charles, Camilla and Diana here and I wonder if the posters are married, and if they really would not mind all the things they think Diana shouldn't have minded especially as a woman who married as a very young 19 year old.
Totally agree, Lima!
Yes I'm married. And I would say that marriage is very very difficult. Anyone who expects it to be all hearts and Flowers as Diana did, is in for dsisappointmtn. I don't blame her.. but she was very Young ad immature when she married. Don't know what you mean exactly .... Di's problems were that she was too young to cope with marriage, to anyone much less a marriage where there was always going to be a huge amount of public attention and people watching her.. She was ill prepared for being a Royal wife, not realising how much "dull duty" there is and how little glamour... or how much the RF loves Balmoral and its rural routines...
She knew - must have known that Charles had been involved wit Camilla and that she and he would be living quite close to Cam in Gloucestershire,... so if she was jealous of their relationship, if she felt that she didn't want to be with a man who was still good Friends with an old girlfriend, why did she marry him? Even she did not say that Charles was still physically involved with Cam in the early years of the marriage, so she was clearly at best only a friend whom he saw occasionally, and Di clearly didn't like even that. but given that he and Cam were ex lovers and old Friends, and that it was well known that Cam was someone who advised him on things, WHY did Diana accept a man who was so close to his old girlfriend?
I'm not sure that anyone has said that Diana should not have minded what she had to contend with, but it has been said that perhaps she could have handled it in a better way. That said, I'm also on record as saying that at her very young age, I probably would have done a lot (or all) of the same things.
Cindy
I agree the problem was that she was just too young to cope. had she been older or at least wiser, she would have realised that marrying into the RF isn't all that glamorous and that it usually involves a lot of regimentation, a lot of well I wont say hard work but rigid "doing duties". even their fun times are pretty regimented and that there was the constant deferring to the Queen and QM back then.
But I think she was Young and immature and she DID see it as all "roses round the door" with a constantly attentive husband who would be there all the time for her.. and not realising that Charles is a loner, who also had his own duties that he spent a fair bit of time doing and his own amusements which he didn't always share. .and which she didn't really enjoy...
I think that she ignored the fact that he had old girlfriends particularly Camilla, at first whom he was still friends with, then became jealous of them when I think she began to understand that she and he weren't hitting it off that well either in the bedroom or outside it. I think she began to find the highgrove crowd dull, old and too "suck up" to Charles and she just could not handle their being around.. either.. or the RFs' killing sprees in Blamoral. Yes, his friendship with Cam was a big problem, but she had lots of other ones.
Camilla as a "friend" was Charles problem. He knew he could never be just friends with her but he wanted to have his cake and eat it too. He had no problem seeing off Lady Tryon, he could have ousted Camilla.
I don't think a woman believing her husband honorable is hearts and flowers. Charles problem was not that he was a loner but self entitled and spoiled. Charles wanted her as a broodmare and that was why he chose someone so much younger. He wanted the heirs, the wife, and the mistress.
Diana was not prepared to be a Royal but she was a natural, and just went on with it and did the tours and appearances and the public took to her. Charles other problem was that he was jealous of his own wife. Diana did her royal duties and did not find them "dull." Her work turned out to be something she took to.
Quote from: amabel on October 04, 2014, 11:44:02 AM
Yes I'm married. And I would say that marriage is very very difficult. Anyone who expects it to be all hearts and Flowers as Diana did, is in for dsisappointmtn. I don't blame her.. but she was very Young ad immature when she married. Don't know what you mean exactly .... Di's problems were that she was too young to cope with marriage, to anyone much less a marriage where there was always going to be a huge amount of public attention and people watching her.. She was ill prepared for being a Royal wife, not realising how much "dull duty" there is and how little glamour... or how much the RF loves Balmoral and its rural routines...
She knew - must have known that Charles had been involved wit Camilla and that she and he would be living quite close to Cam in Gloucestershire,... so if she was jealous of their relationship, if she felt that she didn't want to be with a man who was still good Friends with an old girlfriend, why did she marry him? Even she did not say that Charles was still physically involved with Cam in the early years of the marriage, so she was clearly at best only a friend whom he saw occasionally, and Di clearly didn't like even that. but given that he and Cam were ex lovers and old Friends, and that it was well known that Cam was someone who advised him on things, WHY did Diana accept a man who was so close to his old girlfriend?
The thing is Charles was passing off Camilla as a "friend" and even had Diana spend time with her. Why did Diana accept Charles? Well she believed in HIM and at the time thought he would behave honorably and say goodbye to Camilla. She did not count on Camilla not wanting to give Charles up and Charles not being willing to keep Camilla totally out of his life. It was not as if she "asked for it" or was a masochist of some sort. At the time she thought Charles loved her and only her.
Plus Camilla was a rather plain woman with a husband and two young children.
Diana had a splendid work ethic I don't get the put downs of that.
Quote from: cinrit on October 04, 2014, 12:06:51 PM
I'm not sure that anyone has said that Diana should not have minded what she had to contend with, but it has been said that perhaps she could have handled it in a better way. That said, I'm also on record as saying that at her very young age, I probably would have done a lot (or all) of the same things.
Cindy
Cindy, I don't mean this as a personal question but honestly, if you were not into huntin' and shooting etc. would you marry one of the senior royals?? I do question Why Diana did that. OK she was brought up to the upper class country background of "killing things" and tolerated it, but surely she must have realised on some level that she didn't really like it much and found it boring.. yet she MUST Have known that Charles loves it. That they would spend as much time up at Balmoral or some country place watching animals being hunted as they would going to the opera..
^^ That's a hard question to answer, amabel. I'm deeply into animal welfare and against hunting, so my answer would be no...I wouldn't marry anyone who was into hunting and shooting be they royal or not, even at 19 or 20 years of age. I'm not sure Diana was thinking that way, though. She may have found it boring, but I'm not sure that she found it offensive, at least not at that stage of her life. I think later, she was totally against it....
Cindy
Quote from: amabel on October 04, 2014, 12:26:12 PM
Quote from: cinrit on October 04, 2014, 12:06:51 PM
I'm not sure that anyone has said that Diana should not have minded what she had to contend with, but it has been said that perhaps she could have handled it in a better way. That said, I'm also on record as saying that at her very young age, I probably would have done a lot (or all) of the same things.
Cindy
Cindy, I don't mean this as a personal question but honestly, if you were not into huntin' and shooting etc. would you marry one of the senior royals?? I do question Why Diana did that. OK she was brought up to the upper class country background of "killing things" and tolerated it, but surely she must have realised on some level that she didn't really like it much and found it boring.. yet she MUST Have known that Charles loves it. That they would spend as much time up at Balmoral or some country place watching animals being hunted as they would going to the opera..
Which is why I think Diana (who had had no serious boyfriends) fell in love with a fantasy figure from a Cartland or Mills and Boon novel, who would sweep her away to his palace where they would live happily ever after. I do not think that she thought of royal routine or hunting, shooting and fishing and polo. Just that she would be safe forever.
Charles wanted a mother for his heirs and she was much younger. So the girl was naive about life and fell for him . She though he loved her too. And the man did propose to her.
Charles knew darn well Diana fell off a horse and did not hunt (as did the populace of the world before Diana got married). When he and Diana went to Balmoral she went on walks with him and watched him fish (which was where she was first seen with him). And once again, she had bad morning sickness the first time after the marriage she went to Balmoral. Nobody should blame her for not going out watching animals get shot--when she felt like throwing up. Kate gets passes for this now.
Double post auto-merged: October 04, 2014, 03:25:05 PM
Quote from: cinrit on October 04, 2014, 12:50:12 PM
^^ That's a hard question to answer, amabel. I'm deeply into animal welfare and against hunting, so my answer would be no...I wouldn't marry anyone who was into hunting and shooting be they royal or not, even at 19 or 20 years of age. I'm not sure Diana was thinking that way, though. She may have found it boring, but I'm not sure that she found it offensive, at least not at that stage of her life. I think later, she was totally against it....
Cindy
To be fair Charles gave up hunting during the time one of his lady friends urged him to go vegetarian.
Quote from: cinrit on October 04, 2014, 12:50:12 PM
^^ That's a hard question to answer, amabel. I'm deeply into animal welfare and against hunting, so my answer would be no...I wouldn't marry anyone who was into hunting and shooting be they royal or not, even at 19 or 20 years of age. I'm not sure Diana was thinking that way, though. She may have found it boring, but I'm not sure that she found it offensive, at least not at that stage of her life. I think later, she was totally against it....
Cindy
thanks Cindy It does baffle me a bit, sicne I am sure on some level she knew that she found country life and picking up birds and tramping on muddy walks and watching men shoot boring...why did she do it? I suppose it is like marrying a man who likes football and going to the games for a while, but then giving up. But the RF take their hobbies like shooting very seriously, and I think that Charles had been doing the fishing and shooting etc for so long he wasn't likely to give them up.. I don't think he minded if Di didn't come along but she didn't want to go BUT was bored and unhappy when left to her own devices. And I think that she gave up the "Liking to watch him shoot" etc rather abruptly and very early in their marriage.
I don't know if she was ever against it from a principled POV even later in life. I think she was Ok with it and with the boys doing it, but had no interest herself and found it boring.. Rosa Monckton said that she sadi at one stage that they boys were "Out killing things", when at Balmoral, and that she had had been brought up to that sort of blood sport life, and had no real problem with it except that she had no interest in it either. but problaby the "being in love" with Charles was at first enough to blind her...
Double post auto-merged: October 04, 2014, 04:55:30 PM
Quote from: Curryong on October 04, 2014, 12:51:23 PM
Quote from: amabel on October 04, 2014, 12:26:12 PM
Quote from: cinrit on October 04, 2014, 12:06:51 PM
Cindy
Which is why I think Diana (who had had no serious boyfriends) fell in love with a fantasy figure from a Cartland or Mills and Boon novel, who would sweep her away to his palace where they would live happily ever after. I do not think that she thought of royal routine or hunting, shooting and fishing and polo. Just that she would be safe forever.
I agree. I think that she saw marriage to him as a haven, and didn't think about the duties or the Balmoral routine. But she was much the same at 30plus when she fell in love with Hasnat Khan, hoping and expecting that he would be there as teh perfect husband and be there all the time for her..
Diana went to watch polo games, they took annual ski trips, and liked swimming. Yes, they did have things in common. Diana did not ride and Charles would have known that (since every body else did). Diana had morning sickness at Balmoral 1981 which did not make it a joyful experience to go out trekking when she felt sick. Diana was not a huntress and their dates did not consist of Diana shooting things--she would walk with Charles in Balmoral, watch him fish and hunt. The man knew she was not big on hunting. Some fairness please.
Hasnet and Diana were together and it was not necessarily Diana's fault that it did not work out. He did not want to be seen with her in public. She grew tired of it. Couples do break up.
Diana did not want her husband to have Camilla on the side as a friend (with benefits).
Quote from: cinrit on October 04, 2014, 12:50:12 PM
^^ That's a hard question to answer, amabel. I'm deeply into animal welfare and against hunting, so my answer would be no...I wouldn't marry anyone who was into hunting and shooting be they royal or not, even at 19 or 20 years of age. I'm not sure Diana was thinking that way, though. She may have found it boring, but I'm not sure that she found it offensive, at least not at that stage of her life. I think later, she was totally against it....
Cindy
I agree that initially she wasn't against it but just not enthusiastic about it personally. Diana grew up in that country sport environment and the food she ate at Althorp was apparently all estate generated (produce, meat, game.)
Quote from: sandy on October 04, 2014, 05:55:12 PM
Diana was not a huntress and their dates did not consist of Diana shooting things--she would walk with Charles in Balmoral, watch him fish and hunt. The man knew she was not big on hunting. Some fairness please.
Well, for the sake of fairness, how was he supposed to know that when she initially went with him willingly?
Cindy
Quote from: cinrit on October 04, 2014, 06:29:28 PM
Quote from: sandy on October 04, 2014, 05:55:12 PM
Diana was not a huntress and their dates did not consist of Diana shooting things--she would walk with Charles in Balmoral, watch him fish and hunt. The man knew she was not big on hunting. Some fairness please.
Well, for the sake of fairness, how was he supposed to know that when she initially went with him willingly?
Cindy
She did watch him shooting. James Whittaker mentions IIRC her watching him shoot at Althrop, and she watched him fishing at Balmoral. She did not shoot herself, some women do but most don't... and she didn't hunt because she had fallen off her pony and lost her nerve.. but she watched Char pursue his country sports quite happily. I think if she hadn't, he woud not have been interested in her.. Other girls he Had taken out didn't like Balmoral and showed their boredom and were dropped or dropped out of their relationships. The fact that their relationship lasted proves that she did show a reasonable interest in his country sporting...
Jecca is a woman and hunts. Camilla hunted. There are royal women who do hunt. Even the Queen.
Charles goal was to have heirs with Diana I doubt his first priority was watching her follow him on hunting trips.Of course he was interested in her because: she was fertile, she was blue blooded, and had no past. If he had a woman who adored hunting but was not blue blooded and/or not fertile she probably would not have made his list.
Double post auto-merged: October 04, 2014, 10:54:25 PM
Quote from: cinrit on October 04, 2014, 06:29:28 PM
Quote from: sandy on October 04, 2014, 05:55:12 PM
Diana was not a huntress and their dates did not consist of Diana shooting things--she would walk with Charles in Balmoral, watch him fish and hunt. The man knew she was not big on hunting. Some fairness please.
Well, for the sake of fairness, how was he supposed to know that when she initially went with him willingly?
Cindy
Charles knew she did not hunt. Everybody did. Diana had morning sickness on the honeymoon at Balmoral which would put a damper on her wanting to watch Charles stalk game.
well Charles did his share of pretending presenting Camilla as the Safe Married Friend. Call that honest?
Quote from: amabel on October 04, 2014, 06:47:17 PM
Quote from: cinrit on October 04, 2014, 06:29:28 PM
Quote from: sandy on October 04, 2014, 05:55:12 PM
Diana was not a huntress and their dates did not consist of Diana shooting things--she would walk with Charles in Balmoral, watch him fish and hunt. The man knew she was not big on hunting. Some fairness please.
Well, for the sake of fairness, how was he supposed to know that when she initially went with him willingly?
Cindy
She did watch him shooting. James Whittaker mentions IIRC her watching him shoot at Althrop, and she watched him fishing at Balmoral. She did not shoot herself, some women do but most don't... and she didn't hunt because she had fallen off her pony and lost her nerve.. but she watched Char pursue his country sports quite happily. I think if she hadn't, he woud not have been interested in her.. Other girls he Had taken out didn't like Balmoral and showed their boredom and were dropped or dropped out of their relationships. The fact that their relationship lasted proves that she did show a reasonable interest in his country sporting...
AFAIK they met or reconnected when Charles was at a shooting party and she was there in the field.
Diana did ride - there are a few photos of her riding with the Queen
At some point the post mortems are besides the point - Camilla's status when Charles becomes King is not a question of popularity or how we feel about her behavior - it is a matter of state and as such will be handled with the concerns of the state in mind - hence she will be Queen consort. Anything otherwise is a blow against the prestige of the crown - Camilla having to curtsy or give place of precedence to the other European royals - her lower status being a constant signal that she was involved in an adulterous relationship and hence a constant reproof against Charles too. That simply won't be allowed so Camilla will be Queen - the diplomatic and national prestige issues being too great to allow an indulgence to people's distaste about her (and Charles) past.
I think Diana had problems that go beyond being young and immature - problems that were exacerbated by the pressures of royal life and a philandering husband. I find it so tragic she did not get the opportunity to resolve those issues and find a satisfying life for herself - see her sons grow up too. But I also cannot see condemning Charles forever -or placing all the blame on him.
Quote from: cate1949 on October 05, 2014, 05:46:53 AM
Diana did ride - there are a few photos of her riding with the Queen
At some point the post mortems are besides the point - Camilla's status when Charles becomes King is not a question of popularity or how we feel about her behavior - it is a matter of state and as such will be handled with the concerns of the state in mind - hence she will be Queen consort. Anything otherwise is a blow against the prestige of the crown - Camilla having to curtsy or give place of precedence to the other European royals - her lower status being a constant signal that she was involved in an adulterous relationship and hence a constant reproof against Charles too.
I think Diana had problems that go beyond being young and immature - problems that were exacerbated by the
she did ride, but she wasn't that keen on it, I think she occasional tried riding to please the Queen or Charles, and of course she got James Hewitt to teach her to ride again, and went with him.. !
but She just wasn't really into the country sports, but I think that as a daughter of Altrop she was accustomed enough ot them to see them as a background for meeting visitors and she certainly watched C shooting and fishing and playing polo. She presumably didn't given any sign of distaste for it or I don't think he would have pursued their relationship because he expected a certain interest in his favourite sports from any serious girlfriend.
I agree about Cam's status in that as Charles' wife, she's going to share his status. I think the Queen has a bit of a problem not with her per se but the fact that she was C's Mistress for a time and was "caught at it". but if adultery was to be such an issue, she's hardly the only woman with a few affairs in her life who is close to a throne. If Di had remained Married to Charles, had they gotten over their differences and reached the time when they were king and queen, both of them would have had affairs in their past..
And anyway Cate I don't believe that the public cares any more apart from people who were ardent Di fans. Most people aren't religious and while they might not entirely approve of Cams having been C's mistress, their attitude is that "it all happened years ago, they're happily married, the boys are OK with her, what's the point of going on about things that happened in the past?" and don't see any problem with Cam having her husband's status..
Very good post, cate.
I don't see how being head of the Church can be reconciled with half a life lived on immoral standards. Especially the way Charles and Camilla went about it. It's absurd.
It's been an issue since the establishment of a secular head of the church. Very difficult moral question.
It is an issue, but after all other Supreme governors of te church have hardly been perfectly moral, sexually, what about Edw VII? Or Ed VIII? or George IV? and its not unknown for clergymen to have divorces and remarry... Besides, that is something that may not be around for much longer... and the C of E has indicated that its OK with Charles marrying Camilla.
I know that's why I said it's been an issue since secular heads have been in place. Perhaps another change may occur, perhaps not.
its not just an issue with secular heads. there have been clerical heads of churches who were hardly angelic in their conduct.
And they were likewise attacked for it.
really? Do you mean the Reformation? I think it is probably foolish to have a secular supreme governor of the C of E, but if there is one, it is also foolish to expect them to behave in the same way as a clerical head might.
Which is the problem when you are head of the church. I've always found it to be problematic and the question has been around since Henry VIII created the Church.
To be fair, though, Charles has said that he wants to be Defender of Faiths rather than the title of supreme head of the Church of England, and he has certainly been vocal in his support of persecuted Christians in the Middle East.
The holder of the title Defender of the Faith is the secular head of the Church of England, which may very well be uncoupled from its role as the State church in a decade or two. Secular heads SHOULD lead exemplary lives and in modern times most have done so, Victoria, Georges V and VI and the Queen.
It might be a good idea as defender of the faith, but he would have to stipulate exactly what that would entail.
The first Defender of the Faith was married six times, and beheaded two of those wives. Just wanted to put that out there, though we all know. :P
Cindy
^ I laughed. If you toss in German and Italian principalities, and even some infamous papal characters throughout history, we have quite the buffet of people ordained by God doing a shoddy job of "defending the faith". :wacko:^
Charles's more agnostic approach is a tad more honest, I guess.
EDIT: I forgot to mention Tsars and Tsarinas of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Quote from: cate1949 on October 05, 2014, 05:46:53 AM
Diana did ride - there are a few photos of her riding with the Queen
At some point the post mortems are besides the point - Camilla's status when Charles becomes King is not a question of popularity or how we feel about her behavior - it is a matter of state and as such will be handled with the concerns of the state in mind - hence she will be Queen consort. Anything otherwise is a blow against the prestige of the crown - Camilla having to curtsy or give place of precedence to the other European royals - her lower status being a constant signal that she was involved in an adulterous relationship and hence a constant reproof against Charles too. That simply won't be allowed so Camilla will be Queen - the diplomatic and national prestige issues being too great to allow an indulgence to people's distaste about her (and Charles) past.
I think Diana had problems that go beyond being young and immature - problems that were exacerbated by the pressures of royal life and a philandering husband. I find it so tragic she did not get the opportunity to resolve those issues and find a satisfying life for herself - see her sons grow up too. But I also cannot see condemning Charles forever -or placing all the blame on him.
Diana never rode to the hunts. When Fergie came into the family she was constantly riding with the Queen. I only saw one photo of Diana on a horse next to the Queen.
I don't see placing all the blame on Diana. I think Charles is reprehensible in bringing her into a sordid situation. He wanted heirs and he married her for expediency's sake. Better for him not to have married maybe down the road he could have still married Camilla. There was a line of succession in place. Unless he found a woman who'd marry for money and prestige and agree to the terms of the marriage (including Camilla) he should not have married anyone knowing he could not be faithful to her.
Double post auto-merged: October 05, 2014, 10:44:28 PM
Quote from: Curryong on October 05, 2014, 08:51:03 PM
To be fair, though, Charles has said that he wants to be Defender of Faiths rather than the title of supreme head of the Church of England, and he has certainly been vocal in his support of persecuted Christians in the Middle East.
The holder of the title Defender of the Faith is the secular head of the Church of England, which may very well be uncoupled from its role as the State church in a decade or two. Secular heads SHOULD lead exemplary lives and in modern times most have done so, Victoria, Georges V and VI and the Queen.
I think he should not be Defender of Faith. I don't think it appropriate. If he wants to drop the Defender title altogether that might be an option.
Quote from: DaisyMeRollin on October 05, 2014, 10:34:46 PM
^ I laughed. If you toss in German and Italian principalities, and even some infamous papal characters throughout history, we have quite the buffet of people ordained by God doing a shoddy job of "defending the faith". :wacko:^
Charles's more agnostic approach is a tad more honest, I guess.
EDIT: I forgot to mention Tsars and Tsarinas of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Good point Daisy. Now a question, wasn't Henry VIII originally given this title from the Pope due to his support of the RC church against the "heresy " of the new Lutheran faith? I was under the impression that he chose to retain the title even after his break with Rome. Though I have to say that Henry still seemed more like a devout Catholic to me even after his break. He seemed to vacillate between the two depending on his whim and his current wife. :P
Double post auto-merged: October 06, 2014, 03:05:50 PM
Quote from: Curryong on October 05, 2014, 08:51:03 PM
To be fair, though, Charles has said that he wants to be Defender of Faiths rather than the title of supreme head of the Church of England, and he has certainly been vocal in his support of persecuted Christians in the Middle East.
The holder of the title Defender of the Faith is the secular head of the Church of England, which may very well be uncoupled from its role as the State church in a decade or two. Secular heads SHOULD lead exemplary lives and in modern times most have done so, Victoria, Georges V and VI and the Queen.
Could he be attempting to state that he sees the need to protect the rights of citizens to worship in a way that they see fit and to downplay the need for a state church in the UK?
Quote from: TLLK on October 06, 2014, 03:03:45 PM
Could he be attempting to state that he sees the need to protect the rights of citizens to worship in a way that they see fit and to downplay the need for a state church in the UK?
I agree that was his intent, and I think it's a good one.
If people don't want a state Church then maybe Charles could just not be Defender of Faith. I doubt religions would rely on Charles for their defense. They have their own religious leaders to look to. Why would Charles have to downplay the state Church? I thought there was already religious freedom? I think Charles is just getting above himself. I hope he does not become Defender of Faith.
The HoS has been the secular head for centuries now and this is a new way to expand on the traditional title. IMO he's acknowledging the changes in British society and wants people to know that he'll defend their rights to believe or not to believe.
The people already have religious freedom. I find Charles "defending" them totally superfluous. They have their own leadership.
Quote from: TLLK on October 06, 2014, 03:03:45 PM
Good point Daisy. Now a question, wasn't Henry VIII originally given this title from the Pope due to his support of the RC church against the "heresy " of the new Lutheran faith? I was under the impression that he chose to retain the title even after his break with Rome. Though I have to say that Henry still seemed more like a devout Catholic to me even after his break. He seemed to vacillate between the two depending on his whim and his current wife. :P
Actually, the title "Defender of the Faith" was taken away from Henry VIII in 1538 by the Pope upon Henry's divorce from Catherine and marriage to Anne and his subsequent founding of the Church of England. He was also excommunicated. In 1544, Parliament restored the title to Henry. So he was actually without it for quite a few years.
Cindy
Thank you Cindy! I knew that you were a fountain of knowledge for all things Tudor!!!! :notworthy:
You're welcome, TLLK. It's my "favorite" dynasty, probably because they were so ......... interesting. :angel:
Cindy
I'm currently having fun with the Plantagenet dynasty but of course the two were intertwined.
The Plantagenets were interesting, too. One of these days (in the near future), I want to delve more into their lives. Right now, I mostly know about Henry II and Eleanor of Acquitaine and their sons. And Richard III. Those medieval people had a lot of secrets....
Cindy
forgetting the Commonwealth? Anyway - Charles has been involved in interfaith initiatives to protect Christians in the middle east - working with Muslim Imans - so that seems a good example of protecting people's right to have faith - or to believe
I'd say there are elements of secular society that are very hostile to religion - especially Christianity - rights need to be protected