The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Library

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #101  
Old 08-31-2011, 12:50 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 837
Yeah, the problem was mainly Alexandra. They should have offered to take the kids though at least.

The rest of the book does go into a lot of detail about the lavish lifestyle the royal family led through WWII and beyond to the present day. You see how lavishly Diana and even Fergie lived and how excessive Fergie's lifestyle was, as well as Charles and the rest of them. There's no point in there being anything hidden about this. It also talks about how many affairs Philip had as well.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 08-31-2011, 02:46 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,292
Yeah according to Kitty the Royal Family was putting on a front during WWII and weren't roughing it like the rest of the country.
__________________

__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 08-31-2011, 08:39 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,175
And yet for the very reason that Warren mentioned (the strict libel laws) the book was not published in the UK.

Which makes you think....how much poetic license did Ms. Kelley use with her writing and in particular her "sensational claims" against the BRF.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 08-31-2011, 07:02 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,292
England has a tendency to protect the BRF even when someone is speaking the truth. THere are various mentions in the book of the press lying or covering up for the BRF. Seeing as how the book isn't a kiss up attempt, it is not surprising that it wasn't published in the country. After hearing about the shallowness of the Queen Mother biography, I greatly feel that the only way the real truth will come out is if someone not British writes a book on her and perhaps publishes it outside the country.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 08-31-2011, 07:36 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 837
The book however did show the RF in a light that they deserved to be shown in. The British RF made the huge mistake of lying all the time about their actions and I am shocked that the Brits aren't more demanding of answers.

I think Kitty Kelly was actually really, really generous to the Queen Mother, even if Kelly did detail the extravagant lifestyle. Personally I think the Queen Mother was an icon of how royalty should be and that it did compare how the Queen Mother was different from Fergie, when she (Queen Mother) was Duchess of York. It did mention how the Queen Mother propped up her husband and she did after all stay in the country with her children rather than flee overseas. If anyone deserved that sort of treatment, it was the Queen Mother.

Why is everyone so intimidated by the RF?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 08-31-2011, 07:51 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,292
AristoCat are you American? I ask because I think there used to be and possibly might still be similar actions by the US press when it comes to the President of the US. Helping him lie to the public or keep secrets for him. I believe when FDR was President that the press kept quite about his health issues and that he was virtually a paraplegic; same thing with JFK. I don't know if its comparable to lying about George Vs involvement in refusing aide to the Romanovs, or speculated lying about how bad the BRF was "slumming" it during WWII. Perhaps both countries medias just had more respect for the top institutions back then; though I admit it comes across rather negatively in Kelly's book.
Seems that in both the US and England since the 80s the gloves have come off, and they will print anything about anyone no matter their position or job.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 08-31-2011, 08:09 PM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 3,910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren View Post
Kitty Kelley writes sensational books; blurb's on the back cover conform to this style, and truth be damned.
The book is NOT banned in Britain; it has never been published there due to the libel laws and neither Ms Kelly nor the publisher were prepared to place themselves at legal risk.
Quote:

unofficialroyalty.com- Pandora's Box- Urban Legends of the Royal Kind

Legend: Kitty Kelley’s book was banned in the UK
Status: False
Explanation: Kitty Kelley’s book has never been published in the UK, leading many conspiracy theorists to allege that it was banned. The story has now risen to the level of urban legend but it is completely untrue. Britain’s tough libel laws differ greatly from those in the US and would certainly have led to a large verdict against Ms. Kelley and her publishers. As a result, neither was willing to take the risk of publishing the book in Britain. At no time did the Royal Family ban the book.
It is obvious that XeniaCasaraghi and AristoCat failed to understand the difference between a book being banned and the overwhelming evidence (in the book) that would result in a libel suit that would clean her out!

The incredibe degree of gullability displayed by these two posters, exacerbated by their personal animus toward the British Royal Family, is both mind blowing and hilarious. Talk about a little bit of knowledge being a dangerous thing.
Quote:
Why is everyone so intimidated by the FR?
Huh? We have a Constitutional Monarchy not a Banana Repulic Dictatorship! Just pick up any Tabloid in the supermarket and you will see how "intimidated" they are and how gullablie you are.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 09-02-2011, 04:36 PM
IloveCP's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Palm Springs, United States
Posts: 4,890
Even if most of the book is false there is a quote from it that is true.Someone said,"Royal children will always be lonely,that's something they can't do about".

Kitty also claims that Elizabeth and Philip missed a lot of birthdays,first days of school,etc.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 09-02-2011, 05:14 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,292
Most bio's get stuff wrong, Kitty's problem seems to be she angered people by expressing unflattering aspects of the family. Some of the things she mentions have also appeared in other works.

Right now I am in the Sarah years, wish I could see a picture of some horrendous outfit the author is describing. Poor Sarah and the BRF, her honeymoon period with the public lasted around 30 seconds.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 09-02-2011, 05:25 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,373
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Most bio's get stuff wrong, Kitty's problem seems to be she angered people by expressing unflattering aspects of the family. Some of the things she mentions have also appeared in other works.

Right now I am in the Sarah years, wish I could see a picture of some horrendous outfit the author is describing. Poor Sarah and the BRF, her honeymoon period with the public lasted around 30 seconds.

The problem with her book is that so much of it is wrong - and she and her publishers know that which is why they refused to publish it in the UK - because they knew that there they would be subject to much tougher libel laws than elsewhere and would therefore have to use up any profits from that book and even other profits from other works to pay compensation to those libelled.

Any book that can't be published in a free press type country should be regarded with suspicion - because the question has to be asked 'why didn't they publish it there'? and the answer is usually along the lines - 'there is something wrong with the book' - thus its credibility takes a massive hit (or it should in the minds of right-thinking people - I am aware that some people want to believe anything negative about specific people and so they actually stop thinking and questioning in their desire to believe).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 09-02-2011, 05:33 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,373
Quote:
Originally Posted by IloveCP View Post
Even if most of the book is false there is a quote from it that is true.Someone said,"Royal children will always be lonely,that's something they can't do about".

Kitty also claims that Elizabeth and Philip missed a lot of birthdays,first days of school,etc.

They missed a number of birthdays because the children were actually at boarding school when they had their birthdays - only Anne had her birthday always in school holidays. So if you send the boys away to school at age 8 and their birthdays are during term time you will miss their birthdays - sad fact but true.

There are a number of photos/film footage of the Queen and/or Philip with both Anne and Charles on their first day at boarding school - if they could make sure they were there for that, and the fact that they were more protective of the privacy of the younger sons the chances increases that they were there for the first days of Edward and Andrew.

http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=34740 This is Charles arrival at Cheam with both parents - Philip even driving the car about 1.47 in.
http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=42146 This is Charles arrival at Gordonstoun with Philip - from arriving at the airport, flying to Scotland and then arriving at Gordonstoun.
http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=43648 This is Anne's arrival at Beneden with the Queen in 1963 - at about 40 seconds.



Making a negative statement without actually understanding the reasons behind that statement is simply being negative for the sake of it and because people want to see the negative rather than think things through for themselves and see the actual reasons behind the missed birthdays.

Philip - in one of his interviews about Windsor Castle, makes the point that they planned their lives around the school holidays - loving caring parents do that - make the holidays special because they know that school is also important.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 09-02-2011, 05:38 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,292
Well for some people the fact that a book was banned would give it more credence, that there was something in the book that people didn't want to be made public. I'm not saying everything in KKs book is right; but the reaction to it by the British and especially royalists is telling. The entire system of the BRF seems to be to make excuses for their bad behavior or cover it up; Kitty is just throwing back that cover on some aspects of the family. Plus she wasn't all that negative towards them, except maybe Margaret who honestly seemed to deserve it.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 09-02-2011, 05:46 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 837
I think personally the one who deserved it the most was Fergie. In the US we have strict libel laws, but there are a huge variety of books out there that are quite frankly blatantly insulting and sya all sorts of stuff. "The Royals" is actually really, really tame compared to many of the things published in the US. Kitty was actually really, really decent about the Queen Mother and about many of the royals, even Charles. There was really nothing about the RF that wasn't already covered by other biographers. There was no reason for it to be banned really. It talked about the Windsor's dealings with Hitler and that isn't something that the RF themselves did, but hte Duke and Duchess.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 09-02-2011, 05:50 PM
IloveCP's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Palm Springs, United States
Posts: 4,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by AristoCat View Post
I think personally the one who deserved it the most was Fergie. In the US we have strict libel laws, but there are a huge variety of books out there that are quite frankly blatantly insulting and sya all sorts of stuff. "The Royals" is actually really, really tame compared to many of the things published in the US. Kitty was actually really, really decent about the Queen Mother and about many of the royals, even Charles. There was really nothing about the RF that wasn't already covered by other biographers. There was no reason for it to be banned really. It talked about the Windsor's dealings with Hitler and that isn't something that the RF themselves did, but hte Duke and Duchess.

Kitty claimed the Queen Mother was "racist".Well,she quoted a man who called her that.

Who knows........
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 09-02-2011, 06:21 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 837
I think the Queen Mother was just a product of her times; people her age were not brought up to take racial sensitivities into consideration.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 09-02-2011, 06:53 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,292
I think the Queen Mother was racist. Is it really such a stretch to think a white woman born in 1900 has stupid ideas about non-white people?
According to Kitty there are a few members of the BRF who are racist, Princess Margaret for example. I think Kitty not only shined a light on the BRF but British society as a whole and how they treat people. The treatment of the Mountbatten's during WWI was deplorable. The whole Germanphobia going around reminded me of the "Freedom Fries" debacle in the US during the build up to the Iraq War.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 09-02-2011, 07:36 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 837
Quote:
The whole Germanphobia going around reminded me of the "Freedom Fries" debacle in the US during the build up to the Iraq War.
I agree; stripping princely families of their rank over a breakout of anti-German phobia was basically stripping them of their heritage.

I was disgusted to read about Saeah's promiscuity with hard core drug users and actually got tested for AIDS. Unforgivable what she exposed her husband to and she had a sweet husband and the handsome of the three princes in the House of Windsors. Her husband wasn't even cheating on her and she couldn't seem to get enough of other men.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 09-02-2011, 07:45 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Durham, United States
Posts: 756
I read the book and IMHO, it was essentially strung together from various tabloid stories. Again it should be stressed that making the decision not to publish in the UK by both the publisher and the author DOES NOT constitute banning. That is a very important point that some people seem to refuse to recognize. The other point to be made is that if a whole society (for the most part) holds the same view can we honestly refer to it as racist judging it by todays standards. If so, IMO, the US was every bit as "racist" as british society during that time period. And yes the Mountbattens were treated terribly during the period of WWI. I might point out that many german comunities in the rural midwestern US, who had resided there since the 1850s, suddeny came under scrutiny as well and many german speaking communities felt the need to speak english in order to prove their loyalty to the US .... not so much different than what happened in the UK during the same time period.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 09-02-2011, 08:15 PM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 3,910
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Well for some people the fact that a book was banned would give it more credence, that there was something in the book that people didn't want to be made public.
How may times do you have to be told that the book is NOT, and NEVER has, been BANNED in the UK? Or is it that you refuse to accept any information that is contrary to your mindset?
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
I'm not saying everything in KKs book is right; but the reaction to it by the British and especially royalists is telling.
Of course it is telling! Reading libel about people you may like and/or admire is never pleasant, but from the tenor of your posts, this is obviously not a problem for you.

Your belief that Kitty Kelly being an American, means that she can only write the Truth the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth does your countrymen no great service!
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 09-02-2011, 08:21 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,292
I never said that what the Mountbatten's went through was unique to England; so I don't know where all this British sensitivity is coming from. In fact I pointed out that such idiocy took place in the US most recently in relation to France around 2003. And could even be described as happening during WWII with the Japanese.

Along with wanting to punch Fergie I can't stand Diana's grandmother, she reminds me of a snobbish high and mighty aristocrat who would sell their child "for the good of the monarchy or to get a title". Everytime I hear about her I imagine Thomas Boleyn from The Tudors.
__________________

__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
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
Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah (and Queen Saleha) Current Events 1: July 2005- Mandy Royal Family of Brunei 199 05-25-2014 03:33 PM
Royal Family of Brunei Current Events 2: August 2006- Humera Royal Family of Brunei 239 10-23-2013 01:01 PM
Danish Royal Family, Current Events 1: April 2003 - March 2008 Julia Current Events Archive 506 03-23-2008 05:56 PM
Crown Princess Mary, Current Events 5: September 2005 - May 2006 Mandy Current Events Archive 406 05-21-2006 09:00 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth bourbon-parma charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events diana engagement fashion 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 olympic games ottoman picture of the month pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince frederik prince pieter-christiaan princess 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 marie princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william winter olympics 2014


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

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV 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 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:53 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]