The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > The Duke of York, Sarah Duchess of York, and Family

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #201  
Old 01-14-2012, 07:26 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marlboro View Post
Here is something I don't understand - supposedly Sarah and Andrew both want the two girls to become working royals and the palace officials are very much against this idea. How could Sarah put her daughters in this position if she wants them to be working royals. This is just the kind of thing that will be the main arguement as to why there is no way on this Earth they will ever be allowed to represent the Queen.

Is this just another case of Sarah not thinking?
IMO it's inexcusable that Sarah involved the young Princess Eugenie in this at all, however good her intentions may have been. There are certain things that are inappropriate for a member of the British royal family to do and participating in an undercover exposé guaranteed to embarrass and anger a foreign government is one of them. If Sarah or her daughters want to do this sort of work then they should renounce their titles and, in the case of B and E, their places in the line of succession, give up any idea of ever representing the royal family and be prepared to support themselves financially AND accept any potential consequences of their actions without any special strings being pulled for them behind the scenes if they get into hot water.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 01-14-2012, 10:11 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Galway, Ireland
Posts: 323
Fergie cancels US flight over Turkish extradition fears for covert filming in orphanage | Mail Online

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royal-w...turkey-115875-

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | Express Yourself :: Why Fergie's fight is right


Justice for Fergie - UK & World News - News - People.co.uk

A few articles from Sunday's papers. I just hope and pray that the children aren't forgotten in all of this, and that their conditions and situation improves. They should be the real story (not legalities, Sarah, Eugenie, ITV, Turkey, Government Officials etc.).
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 01-15-2012, 10:28 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 6
It appears that my views of the situation are at odds with some members of this board. I find her actions to be completely irresponsible and dangerous, especially dragging her daughter along with her. I could understand her actions, partly, if I thought this was something she felt passionate about. (Not saying that what was portrayed in the documentary is acceptable) But I haven’t heard that she has embraced the cause. Apparently she did not check the legality of her actions either. Since, at that time she was employing a manager and aids, how could this have been missed. Since it was going to be shown on TV as a documentary, their secret mission was not going to stay that way. I personally check the local laws and customs of areas I may travel to insure I don’t end up as the lead news story. Also, things are not always the way the media portrays them. As some people have posted, in regards to the selling of Prince Andrew, that they felt the video had been cut and pasted or misrepresented and was some how a type of entrapment.

The question I must ask, for the people that feel bad for Sarah and think the charges are unjust: Why was it wrong for the NOTW to secretly record her but not wrong for her to secretly record someone else?

Maybe there will be a silver lining to all this. Eugenie and Beatrice may finally be convinced that joining in on their mother’s activities is not a good thing.

Anyone here think Sarah will take responsibility for her actions (any hands) or will she give a long list of the people that should take the blame?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 01-15-2012, 11:55 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 202
Of course, we know that Sarah will not take responsibility, she is not at fault. Don't you know that Sarah is once again the VICTIM. As for it being wrong for NOTW to secretly record her but not wrong for Sarah to secretly record someone else, there have always been two laws...one for Sarah and one for the rest of the world. (Said tongue-in-cheek)

And while the timing of this can't be blamed on Sarah, didn't we all just know that something negative about Sarah would surface during the Queen's Jubilee Year?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 01-15-2012, 01:15 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 2,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by claddagh View Post
It appears that my views of the situation are at odds with some members of this board. I find her actions to be completely irresponsible and dangerous, especially dragging her daughter along with her. I could understand her actions, partly, if I thought this was something she felt passionate about. (Not saying that what was portrayed in the documentary is acceptable) But I haven’t heard that she has embraced the cause.

My views coincide with yours.
Perhaps Fergie meant well, but I'm much more inclined to believe she did it for the money.

(I wasn't at all surprised to learn from the Telegraph article that she got a whopping fee for launching Sarah Selects, for example).

I just do not think altruism is part of her nature.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 01-15-2012, 02:00 PM
Patra's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Southern, United States
Posts: 2,208
The purpose of this whole ordeal was to expose the horrific treatment of these poor children, which IMO was admirable. mission accomplished thanks to the press!
__________________
Patra
God is in the Details.....
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 01-15-2012, 05:25 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,152
My own feeling is that if Sarah was willing to risk breaking Turkish law--AND to suffer the consequences of her actions--to expose the conditions of the orphanage, that's her business. However, she was wrong to bring her daughters along.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 01-15-2012, 05:26 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patra View Post
The purpose of this whole ordeal was to expose the horrific treatment of these poor children, which IMO was admirable. mission accomplished thanks to the press!
Wasn't there any way to do this while respecting the laws of Turkey? I would be horrified to see a member of my royal family break the law, any law. Thankfully whether or not Sarah is royal is subject to interpretation..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 01-15-2012, 06:31 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,446
No way to make this public and respect the laws of the country.

Do you really believe that if they had gone to the authorities and said 'we want to film your orphanages to show the world what conditions are like' they would have been given permission? Of course they wouldn't.

I actually think that the powers that be were supportive of Sarah in this. They would have known what was planned for Eugenie as security has to check out, in advance, everywhere she will be to approve the security angle - they do have the power to stop her going somewhere if it is deemed dangerous and they can't do that if they haven't already done a preview check. So to me the powers knew Eugenie was going to the orphanage so the next question would have been why? To look around - again why? They knew and used the royal connection to embarass Turkey to prevent Turkey's admission to the EU - the royals do get used by the government of the day for their political purposes - the royals can't make political statements but they can, and are, used by the politicians and this is just another example of that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 01-15-2012, 09:36 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,325
I still think that while the "Queen has to know," that Sarah doesn't always follow the rules. The Queen didn't know where Sarah was when she made her "access" deal, did she? I agree the Queen is supposed to know where Sarah is - but that doesn't make Sarah cooperative.

I find it hard to believe the that powers that be in Britain would know that Sarah was going to Turkey to interfere in Turkish policies.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 01-15-2012, 09:39 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,325
And, frankly, any halfway reasonable person who knows what the policies of Turkey are would never permit an underage child (royal or not) to go "undercover" and violate the laws of Turkey.

But if you want to see the British crown (and the other powers involved in advising royals and overseeing passport/visa issues) as being this naive and, frankly, willing to risk a child's life in order to document something already well-documented in many places, go ahead.

We're simply speculating. But I don't believe HM allowed her granddaughter to violate laws in Turkey, of all places.

(And for no good reason - as I've said before, there's tons of other footage by competent professionals, the royal pair could simply have publicized the issue).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 01-15-2012, 09:42 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
It was just plain bad form for Sarah to involve her daughter in this venture, what ever the merits of the cause I have no doubt that for Sarah either directly or indirectly there was a commercial element to it. JMO, but I don't think she has an altruistic bone in her body.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 01-15-2012, 11:03 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi View Post
I still think that while the "Queen has to know," that Sarah doesn't always follow the rules. The Queen didn't know where Sarah was when she made her "access" deal, did she? I agree the Queen is supposed to know where Sarah is - but that doesn't make Sarah cooperative.

I find it hard to believe the that powers that be in Britain would know that Sarah was going to Turkey to interfere in Turkish policies.

The Queen doesn't have to know where Sarah is at all. Since Sarah's divorce she has been a free agent and hasn't had to tell anyone where she is.

The Queen does have to know where the girls are - as did in 2008 the security people around the girls. Consequently when the girls are/were with Sarah The Queen has to know where the girls are but when Sarah is alone The Queen doesn't need to know.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 01-15-2012, 11:07 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi View Post
And, frankly, any halfway reasonable person who knows what the policies of Turkey are would never permit an underage child (royal or not) to go "undercover" and violate the laws of Turkey.

But if you want to see the British crown (and the other powers involved in advising royals and overseeing passport/visa issues) as being this naive and, frankly, willing to risk a child's life in order to document something already well-documented in many places, go ahead.

We're simply speculating. But I don't believe HM allowed her granddaughter to violate laws in Turkey, of all places.

(And for no good reason - as I've said before, there's tons of other footage by competent professionals, the royal pair could simply have publicized the issue).

As Eugenie couldn't go anywhere without approval the only possible assumption is that the powers that be must have known - sorry but the powers do use the royals and underage ones are good for that as no one would put any blame on them.

It is naive to believe that the government doesn't use the royals for political purposes and using Eugenie is good because she is high profile enough to get away with it but far enough from the centre that if it backfires Sarah can take the fall.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 01-16-2012, 12:21 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,868
There's been a question running through my mind ever since this incident has been brought up again. Was Sarah or was she not making that documentary under the umbrella of Children in Crisis? It would really make sense to me if she was because this kind of situation in Turkey fits hand in glove with the primary purpose of the organization. So, lets assume she was. It just seems strange to me that they're focusing on prosecuting Sarah only. As it stated in the article "BBC royal correspondent Peter Hunt said a source close to the duchess had said she had just been trying to run a humanitarian trip and was surprised she was being brought to task when it was ITV that filmed the documentary."

It just seems that there's something fishy about this whole thing. Perhaps there's some underlying agenda by the Turks we're just not aware of?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 01-16-2012, 01:05 AM
HighGoalHighDreams's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Unspecified, United States
Posts: 200
The fact that this documentary was titled "Duchess and Daughters" IMHO says much of what needs to be said about Sarah in this situation.

(If she made the documentary and the title was outside of her control, I offer my sincere apologies.)

Add me to the list of those who are baffled about why Turkey is pursuing this, though. I don't see any favorable outcome for them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 01-16-2012, 02:19 AM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 3,982
I too am confused. By "going after Sarah" the Turkish government tacitly acknowledge that they were aware of the conditions in state-run orphanages and decided it was a state secret. Isn't the "hidden camera" the vehicle by which the horrors of the Romanian Orphanages were first brought to the notice of the world?

As to comparing such filming as being the same as accessing Sarah's, or indeed any royal or celebrity's personal voice mail for scandal rags to make more money? I think the analogy is both ridiculous and disingenuous bordering on the obscene!
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 01-16-2012, 01:40 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,325
As I said earlier, many nations have laws about what can be filmed (or whether filming can be done) in their nation. I'm an anthropologist, most of my friends are anthropologists, and in grad school, one of us got kicked out over illegal filming (photographing) in China. To do journalism OR research in some nations (many nations), you need permission from several sources (for Egypt, for example - at least, pre-revolution Egypt, one needed several permissions if the film was going to be released or broadcast).

Tourist video is different, but if someone sold that video to a news outlet or broadcast it widely (not youtube), there could be problems (usually resulting in being banned from travel to that nation, prosecuted if one ever returns - and sometimes being banned from other nations who share the same laws). It's quite serious and Turkey is one of the least friendly nations. Turkey has been extremely upset about how it has been portrayed in documentaries by journalists in particular.

Sarah is not a professional anthropologist OR journalist and she doesn't know these things (and there's lots more). To possess valid press credentials is a first step - and by valid, many nations mean "having completed a degree in journalism or be hired by a handful of recognized publications."

While it is a heroic thing to try and document child labor, many watchdog organizations already exist and have brought data out of Turkey. Do further pictures really help? Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people, already donate - and thousands volunteer as watchdogs. But not under age people. Most watchdog organizations have good training, the participants are older (and in some cases, are single or without children - because this is dangerous).

Of course Turkey is aware. India is aware, Pakistan is aware, Sierra Leone is aware, Korea is aware, China is aware, Thailand is aware - of their child labor, the sex trafficking, all the other problems too. The U.S. is aware that we have meth labs and drug cartels and people illegally selling guns to Mexico and South America. But the U.S. has a very different form of government - and view on freedom of speech and press - than Turkey. Indeed, I know someone who is facing prosecution in Italy for having made some online comments about a hotel; in Italy, there are crimes of honor and besmirching someone's reputation is one of them (the woman owns property in Italy - she cannot go back and enjoy that property unless she is willing to face the charges). Indeed, France still has such a law on the books (and so do many other nations). Great Britain has different laws about publishing than the U.S., and while one cannot face criminal prosecution for publishing in Great Britain (AFAIK), one faces different levels of censorship.

So, it's important to study the place you're going and in my view, to listen to experts. After my acquaintance got in her Italian trouble, I added that issue to my research charts (I would love to see parts of Turkey, but I know others who have had trouble there; in my profession we share that trouble pretty openly) and so my DH and I are waiting until we're much older to visit both Turkey and Egypt, and a few other places. Getting stuck inside a foreign nation or disappearing inside of it isn't something I want to do until I'm closer to the natural end of my life.

Turkey can focus on whomever they want, but when Turkey (or Iran) go after some people (Iran went after three young American backpackers while permitting many other nationalities to pass), they do it to send a message.

That's how international relations work.

Marg, I love your sig - but it only works in certain places. There are places in the world where wild words (especially from a woman) can get a woman into some real problems. Or sometimes, any words at all! (As I have found out the hard way, myself).

At any rate, Sarah surely knows some of the dangers (and Romania isn't Turkey). I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I do know people within activist organizations who sunshine the danger in order to get celebs aboard (even Green Peace does this - and not all Green Peace activities are a walk in the park). It's fine to put one's own life on the line (I suppose - although I wonder if Sarah is truly competent to make her own major life decisions), but involving one's kids is not good.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 01-16-2012, 03:46 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
It was just plain bad form for Sarah to involve her daughter in this venture, what ever the merits of the cause I have no doubt that for Sarah either directly or indirectly there was a commercial element to it. JMO, but I don't think she has an altruistic bone in her body.
I don't think Sarah is a bad hearted person and in many of her endeavors, likely including this one, she probably does have at least superficially well meaning intentions. But she doesn't seem to be able to consider the ramifications of her actions.

The sad part is that Sarah could have been in the position to make a positive contribution to any number of different worthy causes if she'd played her cards right, even after the divorce. That would have involved playing by the rules, however, and favoring long term, rational thinking instead of the short term high that comes from doing whatever feels good at the time.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 01-16-2012, 03:47 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 202
Thanks for your very informative post PrincessKaimi. It would be interesting to know what the politics is in this case. From our point of view, at this late date it doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense...but there is obviously method to their madness.

Eugenie was a minor in the UK at the time of the trip. Does anyone know what the legal age is in Turkey?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Princess Eugenie of York 5: October 2008-April 2010 Elspeth Current Events Archive 546 04-23-2010 11:12 AM
Princess Eugenie of York 4: June-October 2008 Warren Current Events Archive 241 10-30-2008 12:21 AM
Sarah, Duchess of York 10: February-July 2008 Avalon Current Events Archive 226 07-21-2008 06:47 AM
Princess Eugenie of York 3: March 2007-June 2008 Avalon Current Events Archive 221 06-18-2008 09:11 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth bourbon-parma charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta sofia jewellery jordan kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympics ottoman picture of the month pieter van vollenhoven pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:28 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]