Preparations for the 10th Anniversary Concert and Memorial Service - Page 8

msleiman · #**141** 12-13-2006, 06:36 PM

I really do not understand some of the statments being made here. I would think that Charles would and still does have ties to Diana. I believe that their ties would be named William and Harry. I guess that just because some people do not like Diana means that her DNA does not count. Charles will always have a tie to Diana. He love Camilla, but Diana is the mother of his children.

corazon · #**142** 12-13-2006, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msleiman

I really do not understand some of the statments being made here. I would think that Charles would and still does have ties to Diana. I believe that their ties would be named William and Harry. I guess that just because some people do not like Diana means that her DNA does not count. Charles will always have a tie to Diana. He love Camilla, but Diana is the mother of his children.

of course, but much people don't undestand why the concert (until now is an exit and don't is a proyect of the people (like the conspiracy), if a work of william and harry WITH the permission of charles and ythe queen) and some people it's angry for the popular rection and for that diana is critiqued, the people can said many thinks but the fact are the facts

many people want to yhink that diana never existed, she is dead and end of the story, but she YES existed, have two beautiful boys (one one day will be king of england) and they want to honred to their mother, they are too young when she die and some thing they can do in that moment, now the things are differents.
I don't see the problem, if charles pay the party, if the monarchy pay or the people, for some people diana is the problem, that she don't was forget was the problem, but it's the realil, she never will be forgeted, and the concert are a very good accotions for the fans to see her is honred like nedd to be

corazon · #**143** 12-13-2006, 06:56 PM

I try to say that the concert don't was a proyect of the public in general like the consipiracy that was a popular idea don't an official thing and the queen is consulted FOREVER for avery event into the royal family and william and harry for do this need the premission of their father and the queen

Skydragon · #**144** 12-13-2006, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by corazon

I don't see the problem, if charles pay the party, if the monarchy pay or the people, for some people diana is the problem, that she don't was forget was the problem, but it's the realil, she never will be forgeted, and the concert are a very good accotions for the fans to see her is honred like nedd to be

You may not object but, IMO, a lot of the British people do object to their money being spent, if it is, on a concert for a woman who, IMO, behaved without any honour.

Talk to ordinary people about the inquiry and it's cost and they all say, "God, is that still going on, I thought she was killed by a drunk driver", tell them the cost and they all say what a waste of our money! There are a few hard core fanatics but she has been replaced in the priorities of most peoples lives.

The concert is a concert is a concert, like many of the other money making acts. Band Aid, Children in Need etc, etc and most people only see them as the chance to get drunk and dance.

BeatrixFan · #**145** 12-13-2006, 07:02 PM

Exactly Skydragon. 2-5 million is alot of money considering that money has been spent every year since her death trying to either put up a memorial, hold an enquiry, process plans for an enquiry etc etc. One MP was interviewed and he said it was known by the Treasury as the "Di Sub" - a yearly payment to keep her fans happy.

**Zonk** · #**146** 12-13-2006, 07:19 PM

Let's try to stay on topic please...the actual concert and memorial service.

We don't need to start rehashing the affairs, the breakdown of the marriages, etc.

BeatrixFan · #**147** 12-13-2006, 07:21 PM

We've been told to move on but I will point out that you're talking about after Diana. Fergie was after Diana. Camilla was after Diana. It was all after Diana. Until she came along, the House of Windsor was fine. And thats that. Its a fact.

Quote:

you can't disregard the impact she had on a modernizing institution.

If by modernising you mean breaking the illusion then yes, she modernised. By did any of us really want that?

Anyway, back on topic.

Caswallan · #**148** 12-13-2006, 07:26 PM

I loved Diana. I like the Duchess. As I have gotten older I realize how much more suited Camilla is for Charles. The concert to me seemed like a good idea. Raise some money for charity, let the people who liked Diana remember her. Anyways that is only my opinion and at the end of the day it really doesn't matter what I think because no one listens to me over in Calgary anyways.

**Warren** · #**149** 12-17-2006, 12:17 AM

The thread will now re-open after major surgery. Off-topic, irrelevant, impolite, insensitive and over-wrought posts have been removed.

Here are some Ground Rules

• Members will be polite and respectful to other members;
• Posts re-stating what has already been posted by the same member will be removed to avoid pointless repetition;
• No-one will claim to be speaking on behalf of the British people;
• Everyone's opinion is welcome, regardless of citizenship, country of birth or current domicile;
• A recognition that the Memorial Concert has the approval of Diana's sons, and most likely of her former husband.
• We all know the narrative of the Charles-Camilla-Diana triangle so we won't be rehashing it here.

thanks,

the British Royals moderating team
Avalon, Elspeth, Warren & ysbel

Sister Morphine · #**150** 12-17-2006, 03:02 AM

I think this concert will be loads of fun.

Skydragon · #**151** 12-17-2006, 06:07 AM

I admire the Princes, but there must be a better way to honour Diana than this naff pop concert.

Diana, princess of Wales would have been proud of her two sons on Tuesday.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...urce=&ito=1490

sirhon11234 · #**152** 12-17-2006, 07:57 AM

Well that article does have some point. Its nice that we're going to have a concert in Diana's memory but it would be more fitting if we have a proper memorial dedicated to her.

Henri M. · #**153** 12-17-2006, 08:42 AM

I was thinking about the funeral procession of Diana. When her coffin passed her two sons, her brother the Earl Spencer, her former spouse the Prince of Wales and her former father-in-law the Duke of Edinburgh all of them remained silent. The Earl made the sign of a cross.

I wondered about that: isn't the making of a cross a catholic habit? Has the Earl converted to Catholicism?

sassie · #**154** 12-17-2006, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henri M.

I was thinking about the funeral procession of Diana. When her coffin passed her two sons, her brother the Earl Spencer, her former spouse the Prince of Wales and her former father-in-law the Duke of Edinburgh all of them remained silent. The Earl made the sign of a cross.

I wondered about that: isn't the making of a cross a catholic habit? Has the Earl converted to Catholicism?

I think, in this case, it was intended as a gesture of faith. If you'll note, when Prince Charles placed a bouquet of flowers at the foot of Diana's casket in the Abbey, he also made the sign of the cross. Many people of faith use it, Catholic or otherwise.

I've never read anywhere that the Earl converted to Catholicism, although Frances Shand Kydd did.

Madame Royale · #**155** 12-17-2006, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henri M.

Has the Earl converted to Catholicism?

Yes, and for some time now (or so I have thought and heard..possibly misinformed?)

Diana - Princess of Wales' late mother also converted too (or back?) the Catholic faith.

Quote:

Many people of faith use it, Catholic or otherwise.

I am of the Anglican (Protestant) faith and I cannot claim witness to seeing the sign of the cross being used when at church (not that my attendance is anything to rave about mind you.lol.). And whilst I don't dispute that its up to those who feel it appropriate, I am of the belief that it is, first and foremost, associated with Catholicsm

Henri M. · #**156** 12-17-2006, 09:16 AM

Okay, thank you for the quick reply. It is strange to see that catholicism seems 'en vogue' in certain parts of British society. See the Duchess of Kent, see Lord Nicholas Windsor, see also the Earl Spencer.

There was a time that the old and ancient Duke of Norfolk (the premier Peer in England) defended the honours of the Holy Motherchurch amongst the 'heresy' around him.

Strange, seen in the background of such a proud and protestant nation and nobility, that catholicism has become more popular. Maybe the aristocrats appreciate the conservative attititude of the Catholics on old values (no female priests, no female bishops, no gay marriages, etc. ?)

sassie · #**157** 12-17-2006, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame Royale

I am of the Anglican (Protestant) faith and I cannot claim witness to seeing the sign of the cross being used when at church (not that my attendance is anything to rave about mind you.lol.). And whilst I don't dispute that its up to those who feel it appropriate, I am of the belief that it is, first and foremost, associated with Catholicsm

I didn't say that it wasn't. Henri M. cited an instance where the sign was used outside of a church, and I merely said that it has become a broader gesture of faith, as well. I have seen many non-Catholics use it-including Prince Charles,and I'm fairly certain he didn't convert to Catholicism.

**Zonk** · #**158** 12-17-2006, 09:59 AM

I agree Sassie.

I don't believe that the Earl Spencer has converted to the Catholic faith as well.