The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Weddings

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #381  
Old 04-17-2005, 12:50 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 853
Quote:
Originally Posted by susan alicia
yes serena linley and the daughters of andrew, according to trinny and susannah they were wearing prada, looked very well. and the daughter of anne was wearing pucci.
Serena wore Catherine Walker, you can see on Catherine Walker's website that it was an adaptation of a jacket and dress outfit from the Spring Collection.
__________________

__________________
Kelly D
Reply With Quote
  #382  
Old 04-17-2005, 01:58 PM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by kelly9480
Serena wore Catherine Walker, you can see on Catherine Walker's website that it was an adaptation of a jacket and dress outfit from the Spring Collection.
oh really!

Serena wores Princess Diana's designer i didnt know that! how she collection her dresses? how long her client? im not sure to answer!

Sara Boyce
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #383  
Old 04-17-2005, 02:03 PM
Victoria1999's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by susan alicia
she could have chosen to stay faithfull to charles whether he loved her or not. there must have been a time that she was sleeping with her husband and with her lover and that personally disgusts me.
What about Charles sleeping with his wife and lover at the same time. Is it not disgusting?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #384  
Old 04-17-2005, 07:21 PM
Britters's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: DC, United States
Posts: 878
James, so what you are saying is that Diana had an excuse to be unfaithful and that makes her part in ruining her own marriage okay? Diana could have put her foot down and ended her marriage to the PRince of Wales long before she did, she could have remained faithful until the marraige was over...it was her choice to hop in the sack with almost any man who appeared to have feelings for her. Diana was unfaithful with multiple other men, not just one. And as others have said before, she knew what she was getting into, marrying into the Royal Family so the constant public pressures and being depressed can't really be used as an argument.
__________________
Have you ever wished on a star? It's a magic everyone needs to experience!
Reply With Quote
  #385  
Old 04-19-2005, 06:19 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 364
We can go round in circles for ever more about who slept with who and why they did it. My original post concerned my opposition to the Charles and Camilla marraige and whilst I do reserve some sympathy for Diana this is not the focal point of my opposition to that marraige. If Charles had never been married before I would still be against his marraige to Camilla because I don't think that their long term adulterous affair makes them fit and proper people to be the head of the Church of England and his wife and King and Queen (sorry, Princess Consort) of the U.K. We may live in a more liberal age but at the end of the day every country wants a Head of State it can respect. The Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky affair is an example of how demoralising it can be for a nation when that isn't the case. President Clinton's "cigar" incident and Charles and Camilla's "filthy phone conversation" (remember, she had a husband at this time and he a wife) are among the most embarrasing episodes in their respective countries histories. I don't respect Prince Charles and Camilla because I don't respect a man who sleeps with another man's wife or a wife (and mother) who consistently betrays her husband. If they wanted to marry he should have done the honourable thing and stepped aside from the Throne but they have been proven to be people who have no honour so it dosn't surprise me that they are determined to press on come what may.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #386  
Old 04-19-2005, 07:56 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Britters
James, so what you are saying is that Diana had an excuse to be unfaithful and that makes her part in ruining her own marriage okay? Diana could have put her foot down and ended her marriage to the PRince of Wales long before she did, she could have remained faithful until the marraige was over...it was her choice to hop in the sack with almost any man who appeared to have feelings for her. Diana was unfaithful with multiple other men, not just one. And as others have said before, she knew what she was getting into, marrying into the Royal Family so the constant public pressures and being depressed can't really be used as an argument.
I totally agree with you Britters.

There was multiple occasions during which Diana could've done something in the name of her marriage. But she never did because she was just as insecure then as she was at 21 when she married Charles to do anything to change the state of her marriage, of not for herself then for her young sons.

And if Charles and Camilla's adulterous relationship was bothering Diana that much, she sure has a funny way of showing it: to go out and have some affairs of her own! And if she loved Charles as much as she said she did, even if he didn't return the love, then why didn't she remain faithful until the very end?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #387  
Old 04-20-2005, 01:52 AM
susan alicia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: , Netherlands
Posts: 2,528
james,

the comparision of clinton/lewinsky and charles/camilla are, in my view, totally illogical. the affair of the first mentioned was really tacky, disguting and without love.

Quote:
Originally Posted by james
We can go round in circles for ever more about who slept with who and why they did it. My original post concerned my opposition to the Charles and Camilla marraige and whilst I do reserve some sympathy for Diana this is not the focal point of my opposition to that marraige. If Charles had never been married before I would still be against his marraige to Camilla because I don't think that their long term adulterous affair makes them fit and proper people to be the head of the Church of England and his wife and King and Queen (sorry, Princess Consort) of the U.K. We may live in a more liberal age but at the end of the day every country wants a Head of State it can respect. The Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky affair is an example of how demoralising it can be for a nation when that isn't the case. President Clinton's "cigar" incident and Charles and Camilla's "filthy phone conversation" (remember, she had a husband at this time and he a wife) are among the most embarrasing episodes in their respective countries histories. I don't respect Prince Charles and Camilla because I don't respect a man who sleeps with another man's wife or a wife (and mother) who consistently betrays her husband. If they wanted to marry he should have done the honourable thing and stepped aside from the Throne but they have been proven to be people who have no honour so it dosn't surprise me that they are determined to press on come what may.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #388  
Old 04-20-2005, 07:15 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,403
No comparison!

Quote:
Originally Posted by susan alicia
James, the comparision of Clinton/Lewinsky and Charles/Camilla are, in my view, totally illogical.
Yes. You can hardly equate a "bit on the side" quickie fling with a thirty-year plus (with interruption) long term relationship which has ended in marriage!
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #389  
Old 04-20-2005, 08:55 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
I agree with Warren. Besides, Clinton didn't have to be president, Charles has to be king.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #390  
Old 04-26-2005, 02:33 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 364
If we can leave Diana out of this for a second. Was Camilla's marraige an irrelevence for the 30 odd years she loved Charles? I'm sure that her children wouldn't like to think so.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #391  
Old 04-26-2005, 06:03 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,045
her children knew about her and Charles from an early age.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #392  
Old 04-28-2005, 03:21 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 364
So they wouldn't have cared if she had ever loved their father or not? I refuse to take part in this ridiculous debate anymore.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #393  
Old 05-07-2005, 05:02 PM
ElisaR's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: ., Italy
Posts: 612


I've just found these pictures. I don't think (I hope) they haven't already been posted.

The Queen is looking at Camilla! I didn't noticed it while I was watching the broadcast.

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1.jpg
Views:	190
Size:	48.6 KB
ID:	138275   Click image for larger version

Name:	2.jpg
Views:	191
Size:	47.3 KB
ID:	138276  
__________________
I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.
HRH Princess Elizabeth, Cape Town, 21st April 1947
Reply With Quote
  #394  
Old 05-08-2005, 06:32 PM
Nichola's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: , United Kingdom
Posts: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElisaR


I've just found these pictures. I don't think (I hope) they haven't already been posted.

The Queen is looking at Camilla! I didn't noticed it while I was watching the broadcast.

I didn't notice either, and the newspapers (not that I believe every word that they say!) kept commenting on the fact that HM did not make eye contact with her new daughter-in-law.

I suppose it'll be Charles and Camilla's one month anniversary tomorrow if they were married on 9 April.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #395  
Old 05-19-2005, 08:02 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 364
Yes the Queen is looking at her but Camilla isn't looking back so no eye contact.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #396  
Old 05-19-2005, 10:44 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,505
i agree. It is too bad that others have to focus on one little thing like the comparison b/t the Clinton/Lewinsky and Charles/camilla affairs. They are not getting the big picture. Charles and camilla are not fit to be king and queen b/c they were in an adulterous relationship for 30+ years and he will someday be the head of the church of England and both the King and queen of the United Kingdom. They have shown that they are not right for this.

And I understand that Diana did have affairs, which did not help things. But I think it is also important to note that Charles had affairs too. And now he is marrying his mistress. And possibly he will become king and thus the head of the church of england (which will be a joke if he becomes king). I think this kind of shows that he bears much more repsonsibility. And since he has shown that he is not that responsible in his personal life, why should he be allowed king? let alone head of the Church of England. But I guess some of you don't see the significance of this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by james
We can go round in circles for ever more about who slept with who and why they did it. My original post concerned my opposition to the Charles and Camilla marraige and whilst I do reserve some sympathy for Diana this is not the focal point of my opposition to that marraige. If Charles had never been married before I would still be against his marraige to Camilla because I don't think that their long term adulterous affair makes them fit and proper people to be the head of the Church of England and his wife and King and Queen (sorry, Princess Consort) of the U.K. We may live in a more liberal age but at the end of the day every country wants a Head of State it can respect. The Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky affair is an example of how demoralising it can be for a nation when that isn't the case. President Clinton's "cigar" incident and Charles and Camilla's "filthy phone conversation" (remember, she had a husband at this time and he a wife) are among the most embarrasing episodes in their respective countries histories. I don't respect Prince Charles and Camilla because I don't respect a man who sleeps with another man's wife or a wife (and mother) who consistently betrays her husband. If they wanted to marry he should have done the honourable thing and stepped aside from the Throne but they have been proven to be people who have no honour so it dosn't surprise me that they are determined to press on come what may.
__________________
*Under Construction*
Reply With Quote
  #397  
Old 05-20-2005, 07:31 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reina
And I understand that Diana did have affairs, which did not help things. But I think it is also important to note that Charles had affairs too.
Actually, Charles had one albeit long affair. Diana had several affairs.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #398  
Old 05-20-2005, 08:43 AM
mgrant's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Charleston, United States
Posts: 599
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexandria
Actually, Charles had one albeit long affair. Diana had several affairs.
And I recall reading in several books on the British Royal Family that having a lover was acceptable as long as one was discreet. It's not the best kind of life to live but that is just the way it is.

Charles isn't the first royal to have an affair and he won't be the last. As much as we would like our leaders to pure, sinless, and full of moral righteousness they, just like the rest of us, all have their flaws. Some just have more flaws than others When we make mistakes we want to be forgiven. Charles, Diana and Camilla are not any different from the rest of us when it comes down to that. I know that I would like to be forgiven for things I've done that I certainly am not proud of. I think we should forgive all of them and move on........
__________________
Optime positum est beneficium ubi meminit qui accipit. Syrus, Maxims
Reply With Quote
  #399  
Old 05-20-2005, 10:47 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,505
Hey I would not be so quick as to say that Charles had one affair. There are indications that he has cheated on camilla and Diana. And I suppose you will ask that infamous question, so I will get an article or so later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexandria
Actually, Charles had one albeit long affair. Diana had several affairs.
__________________
*Under Construction*
Reply With Quote
  #400  
Old 05-20-2005, 01:10 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgrant
And I recall reading in several books on the British Royal Family that having a lover was acceptable as long as one was discreet. It's not the best kind of life to live but that is just the way it is.

Charles isn't the first royal to have an affair and he won't be the last. As much as we would like our leaders to pure, sinless, and full of moral righteousness they, just like the rest of us, all have their flaws. Some just have more flaws than others When we make mistakes we want to be forgiven. Charles, Diana and Camilla are not any different from the rest of us when it comes down to that. I know that I would like to be forgiven for things I've done that I certainly am not proud of. I think we should forgive all of them and move on........
mgrant you're the voice of reason! :)

I agree, especially about the forgiving part and moving on. Hating Camilla and resenting or disliking or disapproving of the marriage between Charles and Camilla won't bring Diana back, and won't change the fact that Charles and Diana's marriage was a miserable one, that both cheated on each other, that Andrew Parker-Bowles was likely the only "innocent" one of this equation, etc. Nothing said now will undo the mistakes and the grievances felt by all parties, nor will it undo the marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall.
__________________

__________________
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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympic games olympics ottoman picture of the month poland pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:44 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]