The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #661  
Old 03-03-2005, 04:26 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlightrhapsody
Like I said, I don't believe that Diana was bathed in sunshine and purity, HOWEVER, she never stood a chance of Charles ever making her happy because Camilla had been in the picture long before she ever did.

Just because a marriage has "broken down" or that spouses are separated, Camilla should have turned Charles right around his butt and back to Diana. Married is married. No ifs ands or buts. If you are legally and/or spiritually married, you are still married!

Let's disregard Charles and Diana's marriage for a bit. What about Camilla's marriage to Andrew Parker Bowles? I don't believe I heard anything about that marriage being on the rocks and that Andrew Parker Bowles ever cheated on Camilla from that time. On top of that, they had two children of their own! What kind of mother and wife is she to betray not only her husband, but her children as well? Can anyone imagine the magnitude of shame and humiliation that they felt knowing that the whole world knew that their mother cheated on their father?

Throughout the years and through all the pain these two have caused others, I have not heard one word of remorse for their actions. Not one, "I'm sorry", or anything to that effect. The impression I got from them, especially Camilla is the "Look at where I am now." feeling.

Again, let me say this. My main point of contention is not just the Diana issue. It's a part of it, but not whole. The bulk comes from the fact that these two adulterers are being rewarded for causing their former spouses and children so much pain for so many years. Maybe I'm alone is doing this, but I put myself in the betrayed party's shoes. How would you like it if you had a spouse who cheated on you and was now marrying the "other person"? I'm so sick and tired of others using love to excuse even the most hurtful actions! Just because someone is in-love, it doesn't give them carte blanche to trample over everyone else to get what they want. That, my friends, is my main point of contention.

Thank you Moonlightrhapsody for stating the issue quite clear. It is not just Diana. It is what has been done without regrets or contritition. It is about the survival of the monarchy. It is about William and Harry--the list goes on.

In response to the question of Caroline of Monaco and Prince Ernst, I did not like that either. I do not apply my morality as it suits me. If you are wrong, you are wrong. Diana made a big mistake by having an affair with Oliver Hoare. I was deeply disappointed and angry by her choice on that one. Yes that incident was not high on my list of Diana's good deeds. However, when I compare Diana's misdeeds to Charles' and Camilla's, Diana comes out the better human being in my book.

In response to a previous post, I forget who said it, Harry IS NOT the son of James Hewitt. Diana did not meet James Hewitt until 1986--nearly two years after Harry's birth. Royal reporter Judy Wade spoke to Diana shortly before her death. Ms. Wade commented to Diana how much Harry looks like Diana's sister's son--hair and all. This ridiculous rumor needs to be put to rest according to Ms. Wade in an interview on the A & E network here in the USA.
__________________

  #662  
Old 03-03-2005, 05:40 PM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by susan alicia
from times on line (am not sure whether it has been posted earlier)

Charles and Camilla
February 11, 2005

Solid and relaxed but with a sense of fun
Penny Wark
Notoriously private, Camilla Parker Bowles has, over the past five years, become used to public life with Charles
NOTHING could be more significant than that the wedding of the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker Bowles will be a private occasion for family and friends. Prince Charles may have had no choice but to live in the goldfish bowl of public life, but that is not Mrs Parker Bowles’s way. Much as she has adjusted over the past five years to being the Prince’s consort, she has quietly avoided developing any more of a public profile than that based on occasional photographs. This is not merely because she values privacy, but because she simply doesn’t have the kind of ego that needs public verification.

This is no new strategy. It is simply a reflection of who the woman is, and it is telling that she has long-standing friends who support her. One journalist recalls how she was sent to Italy to interview Camilla on her return from a holiday with Emily Van Cutsen some 12 years ago — after Charles and Diana had announced that they were separating, but before Charles had publicly admitted to Jonathan Dimbleby that he had been unfaithful.

NI_MPU('middle');The journalist approached Camilla in the departure lounge at Pisa airport and introduced herself. Camilla looked at her. “I’m sorry,” she said. “You must have made a mistake.” Emily Van Cutsen confirmed that a mistake had been made. The request was repeated on the plane and a third time, bizarrely, around the luggage carousel at Heathrow. Again Camilla denied that she was Mrs Parker Bowles. And then she started laughing. So nothing had been said, yet, it was clear, here was someone who was good fun, a good sort, someone you would like to know even if she would rather you didn’t.

It is easy to see how this desire to make neither personal nor public capital from being a public figure would appeal to the heir to the throne. She is not threatening to him, she doesn’t seek power, she doesn’t want to possess him, and her lack of pomposity and her infamous sense of humour must be refreshing in royal households where formality is legion. At home at Raymill House in Wiltshire, she is said to be prodigiously untidy: one acquaintance remembers the first time they met, early one morning, Camilla in holey tights, smoking and with smudged mascara. “The pictures and furniture are very good but nobody cares about the holes in the carpet or muddy wellingtons in the hall,” said another visitor.

Those who have met her at functions say, without exception, that she is “nice”, “normal” and “natural”. She is warm and relaxed and has the requisite skill of talking to people who have shared none of her privi-leges with sincerity, with kindness that doesn’t patronise, and at the same time she manages to transmit that she is genuinely interested in their lives. Neither is she above signing autographs for children. Clearly maturity helps — she is 57 — but this isn’t the life she was bred for. Rather it is a role that she has taken on because it is part of the package of loving and supporting the heir to the throne. Only by becoming the patron of the National Osteoporosis Society has she ever put her head above the parapet, and that was because she had watched her mother die of the disease and recognised that a small charity would benefit from her support.

To understand the influences on her it is worth considering her background. The oldest child of Major Bruce Shand, a wine merchant, and Rosalind Cubitt, she had a conventional upbringing by the standards of the upper-middle class and she left Queen’s Gate in South Kensington with one O level, an ability to fence and a forthcoming inheritance of £500,000 from the Cubbitt family.

She came out in 1965, presented at court where her family had friends, and first met her soulmate at a polo match in 1970 where she introduced herself with the words: “My great-grandmother was the mistress of your great-grandfather — so how about it?” Charles, surrounded by deference, was smitten by the directness of her reference to Edward VII and his mistress Alice Keppel. But, famously, he dithered, agonising over whether he could marry a girl with a past, and she married a cavalry officer called Andrew Parker Bowles in 1973.

Charles and Diana married in 1981 and Diana would later maintain that Charles had never ended his affair. Diana was furious to discover that the cufflinks he wore on his weddding day were inscribed with “CC” and were a present from Camilla. But when both marriages collapsed and Diana, always one to make a public statement — remember her solitary pose in front of the Taj Mahal — chose to taunt Camilla by posing for photographs — most notably in a leopard skin swimsuit the day before Camilla’s 50th birthday — Camilla resumed her role as the unseen mistress. She may have been revealed by the earthy, affectionate and intimate Camillagate tape made public in 1992 but, however embarrassing that was, it showed that her relationship with Charles was easy — and highly sexed. By then they had known each other for a couple of decades, yet they were both touchingly reluctant to hang up the phone.

Since Diana’s death in 1997 Camilla has been quietly rehabilitated as the partner and consort rather than the mistress. Each of the steps towards marriage has been small, and immaculately choreographed, a campaign that would make Charles more popular and Camilla more acceptable. In 1999 she made her first public appearance at Charles’s side on the steps of the Ritz Hotel in London where they were attending a 50th birthday party. The following year the Queen recognised the relationship by attending a birthday lunch for King Constantine at which Camilla was present. Camilla’s first public engagement was in Edinburgh in 2002 and last year she appeared for the first time in Charles’s official accounts, confirming that she has an office at Clarence House. She is also known to have been involved in his regular planning meetings, and she is even said to have cut back — not without difficulty — on her smoking.

Such details are all part of the slow shift in public perception that has led to the announcement of the marriage. The older woman — by 16 months — who was once reviled for having no dress sense, has now allowed herself to be groomed to the appropriate standard — but remarkably she has done so without losing her reputation for being unpretentious. Photographs marking arrivals at functions have put the point across — and shown that the woman better known for looking unkempt scrubs up very well indeed — but what we see is a neat and skilful balancing act rather than a transformation. She has become indispensible because where he is formal and fastidious, she is relaxed, but most of all because she is there for him.

This is not to underestimate her presence. Friends will tell you that she is not a pushy person, but this does not make her weak. When Diana left Highgrove Charles erased all trace of her, and a new designer, Robert Kime, was hired at Camilla’s suggestion. Coming from a stable and close family background, she matches his indeciveness with steadiness, and she brings him a shared love of sport, horses and hunting, and the sense of normality that comes from going to Marks & Spencer when it has not been closed specially to accomodate your visit. It is the relaxed relationship he has always needed, and one she has the generosity of spirit to provide. Not that she takes him too seriously, says one friend. “She doesn’t share a great many of his artistic tastes. She’ll say at a Highgrove dinner: ‘This isn’t going to be one of those bloody musical evenings, is it?’ “When he goes hunting she’ll go out in a car with the sandwiches. She’s probably the best therapist he’s got.” Four years ago Charles paid about £25,000 at Sotheby’s for a diamond, ruby and red tourmaline snake brooch that once belonged to Alice Keppel. This is not the first piece that he has acquired from the Keppel collection — he came across a black pearl brooch at a country house auction, and he has also bought her a tiara which he had remodelled into a necklace. Romantic gestures certainly, and in future, modest as Camilla may be in her private tastes, there can be no reason why these gifts are not seen in public.
I have agree with articles!

Prince Charles and Camilla would getting no BUTS, and no IFS since both had affairs and had companion,mistress for more over 30 years but Prince Charles still more love with Camilla for over 30 years but Charles not love with his former wife the Princess Diana but Diana told him need to back as spouse!

I would think Princess Diana had point! because she wanted him to together for more years since 1981 but Charles went see Camilla after both had marriages and he wrotes to Camilla since honeymoon and Diana told him dont write to Camilla during wedding trips but she wanted to together and ingore the Camilla!

I would agree with posts,piewi because William and Harry would getting knew it because his dad still had affairs with companion for more 30 years but i would getting knew also! many people wanted to see Prince Charles and Camilla's wedding or dont! make more hurt feelings follow famous Princess Diana's death in 1997 they wanted to see Prince Charles's wedding if have low-profiles since Diana's death.

on day of Camilla's 50th birthday Diana wores leopard swimsuit on pictures in St.tropez 1997 when she was vacation with her sons and her new lover Dodi Fayeds.

Sara Boyce
__________________

  #663  
Old 03-03-2005, 07:49 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 363
I have to laugh when I hear some so-called Royal "experts" state that at the time of her death Diana was perfectly happy with the Charles /Camilla relationship and wanted them to marry. As the previous post has mentioned, Diana deliberatley showed off for the camaras on the day that Charles was hosting Camilla's 50th birthday party so that pictures of her would keep the party off the front page. Hardly the behaviour of someone who was perfectly at ease with her ex-husband's relationship.
  #664  
Old 03-03-2005, 08:16 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
How could you possibly be a royal expert? It doesn't make sense.
  #665  
Old 03-03-2005, 08:28 PM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator in Memoriam
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,476
Yes, what better way to show one's heartbreak than by parading for the dreaded paparazzi in a leopard-print swimsuit.
.
  #666  
Old 03-04-2005, 03:30 AM
Iain's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by james
I have to laugh when I hear some so-called Royal "experts" state that at the time of her death Diana was perfectly happy with the Charles /Camilla relationship and wanted them to marry. As the previous post has mentioned, Diana deliberatley showed off for the camaras on the day that Charles was hosting Camilla's 50th birthday party so that pictures of her would keep the party off the front page. Hardly the behaviour of someone who was perfectly at ease with her ex-husband's relationship.
This was an old Diana trick. She was constantly doing things to get into the media spotlight whenever the other royals were going to do something. She done it many times to Queen Elizabeth. I remember one occasion when the night before the queen's birthday (I think it was her 70th) a news programe was giving a review of the next days papers and the reporter said "tomorrow is the queen's birthday but who is on the front pages of the papers,? surprise, surprise, it's Diana." Yet again she had done something to upstage the queen.
  #667  
Old 03-04-2005, 10:40 PM
Danielle's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,954
Nine find royal wedding objectionable
11:41 AEDT Sat Mar 5 2005

AP - Nine formal objections have been filed against Prince Charles' plans to marry his longtime companion Camilla Parker Bowles, the BBC reported.

The objections were filed at local registry offices in Chippenham and Cirencester, where the couple have homes.

The BBC did not specify what points the objections raised or who filed them.

Legal debate over the wedding, scheduled for April 8, has centred on the question of whether members of the royal family are permitted under British law to marry in civil ceremonies, as Charles and Parker Bowles plan to do.

The Church of England frowns on remarriages by people who are divorced, as both Charles and Parker Bowles are.

They plan a civil wedding at the town hall in Windsor, followed by a religious blessing of their union.

The office of Britain's registrar general will evaluate the objections, known as caveats, to decide whether they are valid, likely by next week, the BBC said.

Objectors can appeal to a High Court judge if the registrar general dismisses their complaints.

Officials cannot issue Charles and Parker Bowles a marriage certificate until all the objections have been dealt with, the BBC said.

The wedding has hit several other snags since it was announced.

Charles and Parker Bowles - whom some dislike because she was involved with the prince while he was married to Princess Diana - had intended to marry at Windsor Castle.

But planners discovered that, under British licensing law, registering the castle as a wedding venue would mean opening it up to commoners' nuptials as well.

Charles' mother, Queen Elizabeth II, also caused a stir when she said she would not attend the ceremony, although she plans to go to the religious service.

The palace said she was skipping the town hall event out of deference to the couple's desire for a low-key wedding.



©AAP 2005

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=45451
__________________

  #668  
Old 03-04-2005, 10:47 PM
HMQueenElizabethII's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ryde, Australia
Posts: 3,783
Have they announced that will there be any European Royals?
__________________
"God save our Gracious Queen,
Long live our Noble Queen,
God save The Queen"
God save Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
  #669  
Old 03-05-2005, 12:39 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danielle
Nine find royal wedding objectionable
11:41 AEDT Sat Mar 5 2005

AP - Nine formal objections have been filed against Prince Charles' plans to marry his longtime companion Camilla Parker Bowles, the BBC reported.

The objections were filed at local registry offices in Chippenham and Cirencester, where the couple have homes.

The BBC did not specify what points the objections raised or who filed them.

Legal debate over the wedding, scheduled for April 8, has centred on the question of whether members of the royal family are permitted under British law to marry in civil ceremonies, as Charles and Parker Bowles plan to do.

The Church of England frowns on remarriages by people who are divorced, as both Charles and Parker Bowles are.

They plan a civil wedding at the town hall in Windsor, followed by a religious blessing of their union.

The office of Britain's registrar general will evaluate the objections, known as caveats, to decide whether they are valid, likely by next week, the BBC said.

Objectors can appeal to a High Court judge if the registrar general dismisses their complaints.

Officials cannot issue Charles and Parker Bowles a marriage certificate until all the objections have been dealt with, the BBC said.

The wedding has hit several other snags since it was announced.

Charles and Parker Bowles - whom some dislike because she was involved with the prince while he was married to Princess Diana - had intended to marry at Windsor Castle.

But planners discovered that, under British licensing law, registering the castle as a wedding venue would mean opening it up to commoners' nuptials as well.

Charles' mother, Queen Elizabeth II, also caused a stir when she said she would not attend the ceremony, although she plans to go to the religious service.

The palace said she was skipping the town hall event out of deference to the couple's desire for a low-key wedding.



©AAP 2005

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=45451



so...does that mean if someone object their wedding...so they can't marry right?!@ or...does the court need to say they can't marry or ??
  #670  
Old 03-05-2005, 02:33 AM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigheadshirmp
so...does that mean if someone object their wedding...so they can't marry right?!@ or...does the court need to say they can't marry or ??
Oh, I just wish the wedding were over and done with--let them get married. This circus farce is just too much anymore!!

My only concern on their marriage is what honorifics Camilla gets. That is what is truly upsetting--her receiving an HRH and the potential to become Queen. Her ranking as second lady in the land above the Countess of Wessex and the other royal princesses and duchesses is another sticking point for me. While I know they can't deny her the titles because of the Abdication debacle of 1936, it doesn't mean she deserves them .

My hopes rest with William.:)
  #671  
Old 03-05-2005, 02:42 AM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMQueenElizabethII
Have they announced that will there be any European Royals?
im not sure!

i think Prince Charles would intives European Royals or not! if he would intives his friend Ex-King of Greece and Queen Anna-Marie of Greece wait and see on wedding.

Sara Boyce
  #672  
Old 03-05-2005, 05:16 AM
aninhas
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
susan_alicia,

we all forgive Charles and we all forgive Camilla. They are forgiven! But that's not the point. If you forgive Charles why don't you forgive Diana by her mistakes? We should forgive both parts.
But even forgiven, you shouldn't Forget. Forgive and Forget are Different things. And I think the majority of people will never forget what they did wrong to so many people. That's why they shouldn't marry and that's why he will never be King.
  #673  
Old 03-05-2005, 07:52 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator in Memoriam
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,476
Another opinion on Charles

This could be posted in any of a number of threads, but I will post it here to give another opinion on Prince Charles.

From today's Sydney Daily Telegraph.

"Arthur Edward has been a Royal photographer since 1977; he has spent almost 30 years following members of the Royal Family and snapped them in more than 100 countries. He is here in Australia with the Prince of Wales media contingent.

Some of his comments:

"The Prince of Wales and William are incredibly close. I have always said it's a thankless job being Prince of Wales, but it's an even tougher job being monarch. Many people feel he should stand aside from his right to the throne and pass it to William. But he would never thrust that on to his shoulders until absolutely necessary.

William is only a young man and to give it to him would be unfair. Charles won't do it.

The Prince has always felt that it is his duty and his role in life to prepare William to [one day] become King. When the lad gets there he will be ready for it. Being a Royal is a great privelege but it is also life in a fishbowl.

If Prince Charles could meet everybody in Australia and Britain, they would be charmed by him."
.
  #674  
Old 03-05-2005, 12:33 PM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,448
yeah i would agree with susan_alicia

but i would think about Prince Charles and Camilla if people who make cups,plates,whatever!

in 1981 when Prince Charles ask late Diana Spencer known as Diana,Princess of Wales to marry in Feb.1981 they make plates,cups,whatever make more popular for Princess Diana than Camilla.Mostly people collectors of Princess Diana's plates for years after Prince Charles and Diana's marriages in 1981-1997 than Camilla.

But im sure if people wanted to again make plates and cups for Prince Charles and Camilla getting married but i wouldnt think so many people who lived in England wanted to low-profiles follow death of Princess Diana they cant take new plates and cups of Prince Charles and Camilla mostly people in England wanted favourites Princess Diana's plates for longtimes than Camilla!! if people like Camilla or dont! wait and see.

Sara Boyce
  #675  
Old 03-05-2005, 01:08 PM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator in Memoriam
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,476
Cups and Plates

Quote:
Originally Posted by sara1981
... new plates and cups of Prince Charles and Camilla mostly people in England wanted favourites Princess Diana's plates for longtimes than Camilla!! if people like Camilla or dont! wait and see.

Sara Boyce
Sara

Without a doubt more cups and plates of Diana would have been sold than cups and plates of Camilla.

However, it is not a crockery competition, and I would think that Camilla is very aware that she will never capture the public's imagination in the way that the late Princess of Wales did. In fact we could speculate that no-one ever will. A tribute to Diana, yes, but Camilla is her own person.
.
  #676  
Old 03-05-2005, 03:07 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
However, it is not a crockery competition, and I would think that Camilla is very aware that she will never capture the public's imagination in the way that the late Princess of Wales did. In fact we could speculate that no-one ever will. A tribute to Diana, yes, but Camilla is her own person.
Camilla is indeed her own person. For all intents, from everything I've ever read or heard about Camilla, she has never expressed a desire of any sort to replace Diana in the eyes of the public (or William and Harry). Camilla will not become the Queen of Hearts -- by her own choice because that simply isn't who she is or who she wants to be.

Charles has had two very public relationships with two very different women:

Diana, a young, nubile, naive and innocent girl who became a glamorous fashion plate who drew out photographers in droves for her good deeds as well as her good looks.

Camilla, a mature, down to earth woman who cared more about hunting, polo and the countryside more than Chanel whose public profile is more about her adultery than about anything else she has ever achieved or accomplished.

I suspect that Camilla, if and when she takes on a schedule of royal duties either with or without Charles, Camilla will remain relatively in the background as much as she can. Camilla has never expressed a desire to be a VOGUE cover model or to become a fashion icon or to replace Diana in any of those respects.
  #677  
Old 03-05-2005, 03:33 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 26
I think that Princess Diana was more beautiful. However, Prince charles still can marry.
  #678  
Old 03-06-2005, 09:34 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator in Memoriam
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,476
Queen Approves Camilla Stamps

Courtesy AAP (Sydney Daily Telegraph) 6 March 2005

Queen okays Camilla wedding stamps

THE Queen has agreed to issue a set of stamps commemorating next month's wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles, London's Sunday Telegraph reported, dubbing it an "early gift" from the sovereign to her son.

Much has been made of the Queen's decision not to attend the civil wedding ceremony on April 8, and the stamps are likely to be heralded by royal watchers as a sign of her approval of the marriage.
Charles, currently visiting New Zealand after his Australian tour, and Parker Bowles are said to be "delighted" by the news.

The Sunday Telegraph said Queen Elizabeth, who personally approves all stamp designs in Britain, would be shown several possible styles within the next two weeks in order to have them ready for the wedding.

The paper also said that Britain's poet laureate, Andrew Motion, would write a poem commemorating the event.

"I feel it is an important part of my work as laureate to mark significant events in the royal calendar," he said.

The two official moves could provide some cheery news for the couple, whose wedding plans have been battered by bad publicity and sketchy planning since their engagement was announced last month.

Nine legal objections have been lodged to their marriage, even though Britain's top legal authority Lord Charles Falconer has stressed the union is perfectly legal.
  #679  
Old 03-08-2005, 04:49 AM
wymanda's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 1,495
Who are these ridiculous people?

This article was published in the Guardian newspaper. Do these people actually stop and think what Diana would have thought of what they are doing? Given the fact that shortly before her death she expressed a wish that Charles "get on with it" and marry Camilla these people really do appear a little pathetic.

Meet the Diana Circle: the band of fans trying to stop the royal wedding

Group set up to honour memory of princess would rather see Charles abdicate than marry 'Cowmilla'

Mark Honigsbaum
Monday March 7, 2005
The Guardian


They refer to Prince Charles's bride-to-be as Cowmilla, think Princess Diana was the best thing that ever happened to the monarchy, and would like to see the Diana memorial fountain in Hyde Park, which they regard as a "ditch," replaced by a more fitting memorial to a woman who they fear is in danger of being "airbrushed from history".


It is more than seven years since Diana died, but her growing band of worshippers, the Diana Circle, is very much alive and kicking. They would rather see Charles abdicate than realise his "master plan" of marrying Camilla Parker Bowles and having her accede to the position formerly occupied by their beloved princess.

Since Charles made public his plans to marry his long-term mistress - the circle has dubbed the day of the announcement, February 10, Black Thursday - hardly a week has passed without them writing to newspapers and politicians to air their pro-Diana views.

Last week, in an effort to show they are serious about disrupting Charles's plans for an Easter wedding to Mrs Parker Bowles, they wrote to the registrar general to lodge an official objection.

At least, it is reported they did. Despite suggestions that the registrar general could rule on their petition as early as today, members of the Diana Circle refused to comment, claiming newspapers had misrepresented their views and printed "a pack of lies" about them.

"They are portraying us as a clandestine, underground group, which goes against everything we stand for," said Alan Berry, 62, a Ministry of Defence official from Surrey who together with his wife, Joan, is one of the seven founder members of the group.

"The petition is a private matter. We are not confirming or denying anything."

There was no reference to the group's petition on the Diana Circle website either. However, on its homepage, decorated with a pink flower bearing the legend Keeping Her Memory Alive, the group said they were determined to use their "combined strength" to promote Diana's interests.

"The Diana Circle UK is non-political but believes Diana had a raw deal in life and also in death."

Another founder member, Josephine Dobson, who together with her husband Kenneth campaigns tirelessly for Diana's cause, was similarly guarded about the petition. "Charles should not be allowed to be king and that's all I'm saying," she told the Guardian.

According to yesterday's Sunday Express, if Charles is permitted to go ahead with the civil ceremony on April 8, Diana Circle members will place anti-wedding slogans on banners at Kensington Palace, alongside a giant poster of Diana in her wedding dress.

The paper pictured Mrs Berry holding a two-page letter the group had sent to the Queen criticising her for permitting the marriage to go ahead.

It read: "This is not a time for rejoicing but for sadness. If the marriage is allowed to proceed there is no doubt the monarchy will suffer damage and unpopularity never seen before ... how can you permit such a disservice and unpopular occasion to take place?"

According to the group's website, the Diana Circle was founded in August 2001 on the fourth anniversary of the princess's death, when members gathered at Kensington Palace to lay flowers and pay their respects.

In 2003, James Whittaker, the Daily Mirror's royal correspondent, gave the group a boost by publishing its email address. Since then the circle has expanded rapidly and now claims 1,000 members worldwide.

Judging by the circle's website, the group are far from craven monarchists. On the contrary, they argue that the monarchy is in desperate need of reform and could do worse than to take Diana as its model. "Diana's legacy included showing the world what compassion and selfless acts of charity can do to alter the staid, arrogant, privileged lifestyle of most of the royals," reads a declaration on its homepage.

In its latest newsletter, the group urges members to write to Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to publicly repudiate the marriage. "We will not relax until he replies personally and concisely as to where he stands."

Yesterday, Dr Williams's predecessor, Lord George Carey, urged people to "get behind" Charles and Camilla, telling GMTV's Sunday programme that the forthcoming nuptials were good for the monarchy and set an example for society at large. "I think it's good for the country because it's important that at the heart of the monarchy we have stable relationships," Lord Carey said.

However, his views are not shared by every member of the Anglican clergy. The registrar general has received nine objections to the proposed marriage, including one from the Rev Paul Williamson, an outspoken west London vicar who is threatening to disrupt the civil ceremony at Windsor if his complaint is not upheld.

If the registrar rules in his favour, Charles would have to apply to the high court for judicial review. The only thing that could prevent that would be if the government intervened by rushing through legislation.

Yesterday, a Downing Street spokesman refused to comment on reports that the Diana Circle had written to the prime minister and received a reply from his secretary saying that he would raise their objections personally with the Queen.

"We don't discuss private internal correspondence, but in relation to the royal marriage, Lord Falconer [the lord chancellor] has made it absolutely clear that he considers the marriage constitutional and that it has the government's full support."

Charles's nuptials are not the only bee in the Diana Circle's bonnet. Members want the £3m Diana fountain demolished and replaced with a statue to the princess. "I have asked many friends what they think of the Princess Diana memorial fountain, and they all describe it as dreary, dismal or depressing - nothing like the princess, who was beautiful, vital and inspirational," Mrs Berry wrote to a newspaper recently.
__________________
Everything I write here is my opinion and I mean no offence by it.
  #680  
Old 03-08-2005, 10:00 AM
wymanda's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 1,495
Just announced on Sky News that all eleven objections have been dismissed.
__________________

__________________
Everything I write here is my opinion and I mean no offence by it.
Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, camilla parker bowles, duchess of cornwall, engagement, prince charles, prince of wales


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
Charles and Camilla: The Marriage (2005 and on) VuMom The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 1583 04-09-2015 11:10 PM
Charles and Camilla: Visit to Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and the UAE - February 2007 hornsen Royal and Ruling Families of the Gulf States 183 03-02-2007 06:49 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit birthday birthday wishes catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week president nieto; state visit prince alexander of sweden prince bernhard prince charles prince joachim princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 sonja state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:36 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises