rosana
Serene Highness
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2006
- Messages
- 1,382
- City
- ......
- Country
- Argentina
Did anyone buy Point de Vue this week??? Diana is on the cover. Maybe you can tell us what´s that of her "last love".
corazon said:Diana, Honored by TIME as one of the great Heroes
http://www.time.com/time/europe/hero2006/diana.html
Thats exactly true.Princess Diana
Expected to keep quiet and fit in, she instead learned to speak out and became more potent a symbol than the royal house she joined
sirhon11234 said:Thats exactly true.
Is that meant to insinuate that, without Diana, the British people would never have evolved culturally since 1981?In fact, it was a liberating celebration of a life that spoke for what Britons now wanted to be; not defined by cups of tea and stiff upper lips; not deferential; not condemned to live in a nation of perpetual, autumnal decline; not quiet; not old-fashioned; not dull; not sexless.
sassie said:Is that meant to insinuate that, without Diana, the British people would never have evolved culturally since 1981?
Not to criticize the Princess, but that's hardly a realistic statement. Evolution is inevitable. This is akin to saying that without Jacqueline Kennedy, American culture would have remained in the 1950's.
JMO.
not defined by stiff upper lips; not deferential;
I doubt Britons wanted to become mentally slightly unstable ("not dull") cheaters on their husbands ("not sexless") who prefered joining their boyfriends on yachts in the Mediterranean (far, far away from "autumnal decline") and blabbing to the media ("not quiet") to doing their duties. If that is old-fashioned, I'd personally prefer to be old-fashioned, enjoy my cup of tea in front of the fire-place and keep my contenance even if confronted with the real world....Skydragon said:http://www.time.com/time/europe/hero2006/diana.html
"into a miserable land", he obviously didn't know anyone who lived here at that time!
In fact, it was a liberating celebration of a life that spoke for what Britons now wanted to be; not defined by cups of tea and stiff upper lips; not deferential; not condemned to live in a nation of perpetual, autumnal decline; not quiet; not old-fashioned; not dull; not sexless.
But somehow or other, Britons know, and are grateful.
rosana said:I liked the article very much,good portrait of the Princess and the society she lived.
Lily97 said:I believe "the situation" was that Camilla always had Charles heart and was his only true love even if he was faithful to Diana for the first 5 years. Just my opinion of course.
Lily97 said:you cannot deny that Charles and Camilla had vast affection for each other when Charles married. That was the only point I was trying to make and for me that is a situation. We do agree on one thing, Diana was vunerable. As to the article, I think you have valid point.
Lily
rosana said:I admire Diana for the courage she had to rebel against the situation she lived from the very moment she married.What else could she do? keep quiet as her husband and his mistres wanted, but she was not that kind of woman. I liked the article very much,good portrait of the Princess and the society she lived.
Panther2000 said:I love it how Diana thread in her forum seems to have bashers here bashing. it is just sorry really.
ysbel said:It would be great if people could praise Diana without insulting the Royal Family but that doesn't happen often.
Especially considering that they themselves were working together to overcome the animosity of the past when Diana died. Seems to me that, if the major players were willing to forgive and move on, the public should, too.Madame Royale said:And visa versa on occasion. It does, of course, go both ways
I just think it unfortuante that so often they are played against each other from various factions outside the 'know'.
sassie said:Especially considering that they themselves were working together to overcome the animosity of the past when Diana died. Seems to me that, if the major players were willing to forgive and move on, the public should, too.
Panther2000 said:I love it how Diana thread in her fourm seems to have bashers here bashing. it is just sorry really.
ysbel said:Quiet, dull, old-fashioned and sexless as the article described is an incredibly insulting way to speak of the influence of the British Royal Family in the country in the decades and centuries before Diana.
I'm not sure it would be his to sell-he must have filed an insurance claim on it, and if the insurance company paid him the full value of the car-I assume they did, because it was totaled-then they, in effect, bought the car.Skydragon said:Diana Crash Car: Owner Wants £1m
The owner of the car in which Diana, Princess of Wales, died is demanding it is returned to him - so he can sell it as a souvenir. Jean-Francois Musa says he believes he can get more than £1m for the wrecked Mercedes. Mr Musa owns the Etoile Limousine company which rented the car to Diana and Dodi Fayed in August 1997.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/04122006/140/diana-crash-car-owner-wants-1m.html
sassie said:I'm not sure it would be his to sell-he must have filed an insurance claim on it, and if the insurance company paid him the full value of the car-I assume they did, because it was totaled-then they, in effect, bought the car.
I think this guy, by going public with this, is attempting to extort the money from Al Fayed in exchange for the car. He knows Mohammed has the money and will pay it.
Skydragon said:You are right, if he received an insurance payout, then the car belongs to them. Has he though?
If the car is still the subject of a police investigation, they don't normally release the car to the insurers or owner, so in preparation of the release, he could be negotiating.
sassie said:I have no way of knowing if he did or not, but I would assume that he did-since he owns a limousine company, that kind of claim would be standard business practice. Since the car itself was locked up in a police garage for an indefinite time, it would have been the only way, in 1997, for him to recoup his loss. He certainly had no way of knowing then whether the car would ever be released, and since he had lost the lease income from the car, filing a claim would seem only logical.
Now that the inquest is over and the findings are pending, the car has to be released to the owner. There isn't any other law enforcement agency that could claim they are beginning a new inquest and need the car as evidence.
Course, you are right, he could have been playing the odds and not filed a claim hinging on the prospect of selling the wreckage someday.