The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Current Events Archive (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f238/)
-   -   HSH Prince Albert Current Events 7 : June 205 (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f238/hsh-prince-albert-current-events-7-june-205-a-6100.html)

Gabriella 06-03-2005 11:27 PM

HSH Prince Albert Current Events 7 : June 205
 
Here is the new thread for news and pictures of HSH, Prince Albert.

As there seem to be many emotions attached to the current subject, please remember to keep the discussion civil and refrain from making rude comments.

You can find the previous thread here: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...908#post221908

brandysays 06-04-2005 02:08 PM

Prince Albert and Nicole Coste
 
Lillia:

You posted that you felt it was wrong that Nicole came out with her revelations a week after Prince Rainier's funeral. I think you got your facts wrong. If I am not mistaken, Prince Rainier died on April 6. The story about Alexandre came out in the May 6 issue of Paris-Match. A few people might have gotten wind to the story a day earlier, but it was a month later, not a week. A month is a respectable enough time for mourning and why does she have to be on the Royal Family of Monaco's mourning schedule?

dreed777 06-04-2005 02:37 PM

I've been reading everyone else's opinions, so I thought I would post a few of mine. First of all, I find it hard to believe that there's a possibility Alexandre is not Alberts...simply because I can't imagine Albert financially supporting a woman he used to date and her children just for the heck of it - I mean, he's an intelligent guy and surely doesn't go around supporting everyone he used to have a relationship with.
Next, I know that lots of people here feel that she hasn't done what's right for her child. However, maybe she feels that it is in her child's best interest to have his birthright, and maybe she felt this was the only way to go about it. For all we know, Albert could have been telling her for years that "as soon as Prince Rainier dies" etc. and maybe she believed that he would never really acknowledge her child publicly. All I'm saying is that there are ALWAYS two sides to every story. I'm not saying I agree with what she did...just that none of us knows the whole story and it seems wrong to accuse her of being the one totally in the wrong here when we will never know the whole story.
Also, like I said, I'm not "taking her side" here, but it seems that lots of people on this particular MB have it in for her for being outspoken. In actuality, if she is being honest about everything, I have to admire her for not being a wimpy pushover. She seems like a very strong person who is going to stand up for her rights and those of her child. Apparently she is not one to tolerate being "pushed around" or ignored or "hidden" or whatever.
Like I said, I don't know the whole story so I'm not taking sides, but I felt like since most everyone was taking Albert's side, I would just kinda play devil's advocate.
By the way, on all the other royal MBs I frequent people seem to be much more inclined to sympathize with Nicole.

brandysays 06-04-2005 02:49 PM

Prince Albert and Nicole Coste
 
To LadyMacAlpine and Others:

Why is Nicole Coste somehow not a good mother or not acting in the best interest of her child when she came forward with this information? If this is true, the world was either going to know about it May 6 or July 6 or thereabouts. In the big scheme of things, what difference does it make? Any child of P. Albert's is going to be in the spotlight, regardless if he is married to the mother or not. So why is there a problem here and not in any other situation?

And why is Nicole Coste suppose to act out of love for Albert? Love and respect is something that has to be earned. Love is also something that can easily become past tense. Even if it ever was love, why is she obligated to love him now? They are not even married. Where was the love from him to her and Alexandre when he did not give her any documents proving paternity after his father died? What if something happened to Albert between the time of his father's death and the time he was going to make the acknowledgment? I know the possibility of that is remote, but stranger things have happened. Where would his son live after that? Not in that Paris apartment, I will tell you that. Would the Thierry LaCoste's ever admit the truth? I highly doubt it.

What you and others on this board fail to understand is that there are cultural differences here and that plays a big part in how people react and handle things. It does not make Nicole in the wrong just because you may not have done the same thing in a similar situation. In the social circles you might travel in, maybe the women are bred to put a man's needs first and to do so unconditionally. That is just not something a black lady does. She would put her man's needs and desires first as long as she feels he is doing right by her and her child. Submissiveness is a trait alien to black women. She is not going to just stay in the background and be quiet, especially where her child is concerned. She did that long enough. Also, I think Prince Albert and his "advisors" failed to understand this as well.

Remember she had to live with the uncertainty of something happening to Albert for the first 18 months of Alexandre's life and not having paternity properly established. That hung over her head all that time. Now a man in this situation who was doing right by his child would have immediately given her the documents she needed after his father died; she wouldn't have had to go to him trying to get them. She put up with this nonsense for over a year and a half from him and Thierry LaCoste. Then after his father dies, he still puts her through this crap! This is not a matter to play games with. Why would any woman in her right mind love or continue to love such a man? Any man with a mind of his own would not allow a third party to run interference between him and his child and the mother of his child.

Now I am beginning to understand why Prince Rainier comtemplated passing the throne to Princess Caroline and skipping over Albert altogether.

star69 06-04-2005 03:49 PM

Thanks dreed777 and brandysays for your postings - I totally agree

MoonlightRhapsody 06-04-2005 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brandysays
Lillia:

You posted that you felt it was wrong that Nicole came out with her revelations a week after Prince Rainier's funeral. I think you got your facts wrong. If I am not mistaken, Prince Rainier died on April 6. The story about Alexandre came out in the May 6 issue of Paris-Match. A few people might have gotten wind to the story a day earlier, but it was a month later, not a week. A month is a respectable enough time for mourning and why does she have to be on the Royal Family of Monaco's mourning schedule?

I took a bit of an exception to this. When you lose a loved one, you don't get over in in just a month. Healing after a death takes longer and doesn't really have a time table. Simple courtesy to a grieving family who lost their father and grandfather would say that exposing the kind of bombshell that the woman did was highly inappropriate. And there are other avenues that she could have taken other than the public one especially after a death in the family like it did for the Grimaldis. The timing of her decision was in poor taste and causes her motives to be questioned.

dreed777 06-04-2005 05:56 PM

Well, perhaps the timing could have been better. However, for all we know, Albert could have been promising her that "the minute" his dad died, yadda yadda. Who knows? Not us. Also, even the 3 month period is nothing as far as dealing with grief (I know, having lost my dad and my sister suddenly at a very young age). All I'm saying is that none of us know the whole story. If she had waited the 3 months she still would've gotten grief from everyone for it being "so soon" I think.
I also want to say that as far as cultural differences go, I am a 40-year old Caucasian I suppose "upper middle class" woman, married, myself and all my friends are stay at home wives and/or moms. And I can GUARANTEE you that NONE of my friends would've kept quiet for this long like Nicole did. It's not just a black woman thing. In the United States, women do not just sit back and get treated like that anymore. Those are the dark ages. Men take responsibility, one way or another. And love is a 2-way street...if "your guy" doesn't love you enough to uphold and stand by you and your children, you better get smart and take matters into your own hands. Nobody is gona treat me or any one of my many friends like an embarrassment, I can tell you. You have to respect yourself to command respect from others. I apologize for getting so worked up, but like I said before, we do not know the whole story.

leahteresa 06-04-2005 10:36 PM

Aloha, I've been reading all of the well thought out posts and I must agree, this web site is harder on Nicole than Albert. Probably offering her less benefit of the doubt than she deserves. I think you said it best dreed 777 when you said we do not know the whole story....I agree. I think a lot of suspicion is aroused by a question of motive. Why? I personnaly would have sat back, quietly collected my under the table child support, lived in my free apartment and found a new man.....this is entirely my opinion...but it just seems like a more reasonalble alternative.

leahteresa 06-04-2005 10:54 PM

Aloha agian, I thought what I was trying to convey above and I think the problem with NC actions boils down to the age old concept "the ends never justify the means". It almost doesn't matter what happens now because she put her little child's face on the front of a tabloid and in the end it probably will do more harm than good. Like I said above, she had a paycheck, and an apartment. I don't get it. I have a two year old son.

LadyMacAlpine 06-04-2005 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leahteresa
Aloha agian, I thought what I was trying to convey above and I think the problem with NC actions boils down to the age old concept "the ends never justify the means". It almost doesn't matter what happens now because she put her little child's face on the front of a tabloid and in the end it probably will do more harm than good. Like I said above, she had a paycheck, and an apartment. I don't get it. I have a two year old son.

Then you are now understanding what I was trying to say about doing harm.

queenallen 06-04-2005 11:20 PM

Nicole did give Prince Albert time to do the right thing. What he did to Nicole and Alexander was wrong. I'm not susprise that many feel that she "owes" the golden prince something. It appears that everything is about this man and his family. Some seem to forget that Nicole has a family and friends.It okay for Prince Albert and his advisor to control Nicole and Alex, but God forbid that she stand for Alex and herself.

LadyMacAlpine 06-05-2005 12:50 AM

Quote:

And why is Nicole Coste suppose to act out of love for Albert? Love and respect is something that has to be earned. Love is also something that can easily become past tense. Even if it ever was love, why is she obligated to love him now? They are not even married. Where was the love from him to her and Alexandre when he did not give her any documents proving paternity after his father died? What if something happened to Albert between the time of his father's death and the time he was going to make the acknowledgment? I know the possibility of that is remote, but stranger things have happened. Where would his son live after that? Not in that Paris apartment, I will tell you that. Would the Thierry LaCoste's ever admit the truth? I highly doubt it.
No one said she had to act out of love for Albert she said she was in love with him. Love deserves respect. If Nicole's story is true and not saying it isn't she was asked to wait the respectable time of mourning then Albert would be allowed to acknowledge his son. I have no doubts that if something happened to Albert Alexandre would have been taken care of as his son he would have seen to it.


Quote:

Would the Thierry LaCoste's ever admit the truth?
Yes, he would if it was Albert's wish its what lawyers do for their client even when advised against it.


Quote:

What you and others on this board fail to understand is that there are cultural differences here and that plays a big part in how people react and handle things. It does not make Nicole in the wrong just because you may not have done the same thing in a similar situation. In the social circles you might travel in, maybe the women are bred to put a man's needs first and to do so unconditionally. That is just not something a black lady does. She would put her man's needs and desires first as long as she feels he is doing right by her and her child. Submissiveness is a trait alien to black women. She is not going to just stay in the background and be quiet, especially where her child is concerned. She did that long enough. Also, I think Prince Albert and his "advisors" failed to understand this as well


I see the cultural differences. Has anyone on this board besides me read about her culture? What she should have done was go the library to do research and on the Internet to learn about Albert's culture to try to fit his child into his society.

Its sort of like people in my country say if you live here learn the language and learn the culture. I am not saying to loose yours but learn to fit into the one you are living. If you have a child with a Royal not married to him you should do what is necessary to make a transition into that world. As Alexandre grew what is she going to do? This is how we do it where I am from but your Dad does it this way and we live in his. Confuse the child. Bring the two worlds together and make them fit comfortable together. <Removed conjecture>
<Removed personal comments>
Quote:


Remember she had to live with the uncertainty of something happening to Albert for the first 18 months of Alexandre's life and not having paternity properly established. That hung over her head all that time. Now a man in this situation who was doing right by his child would have immediately given her the documents she needed after his father died; she wouldn't have had to go to him trying to get them. She put up with this nonsense for over a year and a half from him and Thierry LaCoste. Then after his father dies, he still puts her through this crap! This is not a matter to play games with. Why would any woman in her right mind love or continue to love such a man? Any man with a mind of his own would not allow a third party to run interference between him and his child and the mother of his child.
<Removed personal remarks>
Quote:

Now a man in this situation who was doing right by his child would have immediately given her the documents she needed after his father died; she wouldn't have had to go to him trying to get them.
You are very wrong. You fail to see the situation where he is involved. Protocol doesn't allow him to make a declaration until the official mourning period is over. If all of you read everything posted you would know that.


Quote:

Any man with a mind of his own would not allow a third party to run interference between him and his child and the mother of his child.
<Removed rude reply> Try sitting in Albert's shoes for a few. He lost his Dad and had a great weight placed on him to run a country even though it is small. He had a son he wasn't able to acknowledge and wanted to. Seeing what Nicole did I can invision what she might have been like those weeks leading up to it. Alexandre was fine, a happy little boy in no danger not ill or anything else. His needs were cared for. She was being more the pushy. Sorry I can't feel sorry for her due to my own situation.

Quote:

Why would any woman in her right mind love or continue to love such a man?
Because love endures and understands. Its not abuse or thinking less of yourself either. All any know is Nicoles side not Alberts. Lets see what he has to say after July 6. Have a good night and good day.


Quote:

Gabriella Here is the new thread for news and pictures of HSH, Prince Albert.

As there seem to be many emotions attached to the current subject, please remember to keep the discussion civil and refrain from making rude comments.



Mom N Me 06-05-2005 02:15 AM

I am new to the posting side of a message board, but I must hop in with my 2 cents. I apologize for the length of my post.

IMHO Nicole has forgotten some cardinal rules. But, I agree that there is probably more than enough 'blame' to go around in this sad situation.

She willingly got involved with a man who was in a very high profile position. With responsibilities to his Country and his Royal Family. He was not allowed to marry just anyone he wanted to -- even to give his child his name. She might hope for the moon but have to settle for a whole lot less.

Prince Albert is a smart man and I am sure knows all about making a Will. If, as NC states, the DNA tests prove he is the father, PA would more than likely have rewritten his "Last Will & Testament" to include his child. {Everyone should have a Will!!}
So, the question of "What would happen if God Forbid something happened to PA between birth and acknowledgement?", would be rendered mute.

By all reports he is financially supporting her beyond what a large number of very high profile men would do, and was planning to do more. I am sure to avoid any future problems, even if there was no future as a couple, PA would have taken care of all the needs of his son, at least until majority. And no one would have been able to deny his son that.

If you are trying to get any man to do what you want him to do -- the first cardinal rule is don't tick him off!

It appears over the years that one of the things that mean a whole lot to PA and most other Royals is Loyalty. And by going public, no matter her reason, would show her disloyalty to him and the child both.

In the end she might get her child recognized as PA's biological son -- but lose the war as far as getting her son an active Father!

For no matter how you look at it when the child in question is so young, unless you completely remove the Mother from the picture, he will have to deal with her for Father & Son to have any kind of relationship. And most of us have, at one time or another, found out for ourselves just how hard it is to rebuild trust (if ever you can) after it has been broken!

No one will know exactly what the true situation is until PA can speak publicly about it in July. At that time both sides of the story will be out and people can judge for themselves, if that is what they want, who is more to 'blame'. If there is any truth to this particular accusation.

The innocent victim in this sad situation is poor Alexander, because no matter what the DNA tests show he will always be known for this story. And if marriage was/is not an option for PA & NC, he will have the press and public opinion following him forever. What a sad way to grow up.

Dennism 06-05-2005 02:25 AM

Welcome to the board. :)Well said. It is often the child that gets hurt the most in such situations.

dreed777 06-05-2005 09:08 AM

Someone could be in a similar situation as Nicole, but every situation and relationship is different. Unless one is privy to all the dynamics of a couple's relationship, they really cannot know how they would feel in their situation. Personalities of both parties also play a large part in how they act as well as react.
I agree that what is most important here is the child's welfare and emotional well-being. Until Alexandre is a mature grown man with a fully developed background and personality, no one will know what is/was actually best for him. Life takes strange turns! Maybe we should all try to focus on the positive rather than the negative...if Alexandre is indeed Albert's child, what a wonderful thing for Albert to be a proud father who can publicly acknowledge his child. He should be able to spend more time with him not having to "hide" his visits.
No matter what Nicole's motives, whether right or wrong, it's done now, so the only productive way to manage the situation is to try to make the best of it for the child's welfare. I'm sure if Albert is the father, he will do so willingly. He seems like a caring individual. As far as Nicole, like I said, we don't really know anything about her and her situation, so it seems a little harsh to me to keep berating her for something that is already done now anyway. If she was such a bad person, surely Albert wouldn't have had such a long-lasting relationship with her :)

semisquare 06-05-2005 11:30 AM

Quote:

so it seems a little harsh to me to keep berating her for something that is already done now anyway
.
dreed777 u r right whats done is done and nothing can change. :(

Quote:

It appears over the years that one of the things that mean a whole lot to PA and most other Royals is Loyalty. And by going public, no matter her reason, would show her disloyalty to him and the child both.
mom-n-me
loyality is very important even to regular people. this is the one thing u can take with u no matter where u live, work etc. and is the hardest quality to fine in people today.

dreed777 06-05-2005 12:35 PM

There are lots of royal message boards out there. A good one is www.rbhq.net. They've had quite a lively discussion about the Albert & Nicole situation. A few others are:
www.members3.boardhost.com/EuropeanRoyals, www.members3.boardhost.com/Francoiberian, www.members4.boardhost.com/CronePrincess.
However, TRF is probably my favorite, cause I LOVE all the pics and folks here are great to share their pics!
I'm usually just a reader, not much of a poster. I just kinda started feeling sorry for Nicole being bashed so much when we actually have no clue why she did what she did. I am not saying I take her side, just that there are always two sides. It's pretty rare for a situation like this to develop with only one side totally in the wrong. Nobody's perfect and always in the right, not even royals. :) After all, they are human, also. I guess I feel that it's a little presumptious to just decide Albert is totally in the right just because we like and admire him (which I do, by the way). I've always tried to be fair and open-minded before forming opinions set in stone. The jury will be out on this situation forever. There's obviously no way the public can ever possibly know the whole story.

Lillia 06-05-2005 05:24 PM

[QUOTE=brandysays]To LadyMacAlpine and Others:

"What you and others on this board fail to understand is that there are cultural differences here and that plays a big part in how people react and handle things. It does not make Nicole in the wrong just because you may not have done the same thing in a similar situation. In the social circles you might travel in, maybe the women are bred to put a man's needs first and to do so unconditionally. That is just not something a black lady does. She would put her man's needs and desires first as long as she feels he is doing right by her and her child. Submissiveness is a trait alien to black women." [QUOTE]

Brandysays -- This is a very, very unfair thing for you or anyone else to try to sweep a sterotype onto black ladies or try to insult any other lady in any particular way -- no matter how noble the supposed cause; just the same, someone else would also want to stereotype women another way. It is a very, very unfortunate thing, in my opinion -- but it seems that some people, I guess, are clearly just not able to help themselves on this pathetic issue.

Notwithstanding cultural differences, which I have and do fully acknowledge and understand play a big part in how people relate to each other and to situations, no one has the place to categorize the way someone respond to anything based on their ethnicity. No matter who the person or what they have done.

semisquare 06-05-2005 09:16 PM

hes a cutie, his cheek are screaming to be pinch :D

lashinka2002 06-06-2005 10:21 AM

There is only loyalty to the father of your child if he has earned it. <Removed personal comments> I'm not saying that Nicole should not be loyal (I have not heard one mean or nasty comment from her about him, therefore I think she is still loyal to him and cares for him in some way) but that her loyalty to her son now comes before that of her loyalty to Albert since he has proven himself unworthy of his word. (I do truly believe she was given the run around by Albert and his "organization" as well - which is completely unacceptable)

If you say there is loyalty to the father of your child should there not be loyalty to the mother of your child? She went through an entire pregnancy, presented him with a son, cares for him only to be hidden away for 2 yrs...which is rather a insulting rejection. Yes, he's a prince and things have to be done differently because of that, I know. Yes, there's a mourning period & protocol we all know that but isn't it obvious that if he had handled things correctly & respectfully with Nicole she would have stayed quiet for another 2 months (aside from that 2 years acknowledgement law in France) I believe she would have respected his wishes that way becuse she had already respected them for so long.
Also, he may have paid for this and that and provided for whatever but the money does not compensate for the lack of public acknowledgement from Albert for the child that Alexandre is bound to grow up and be hurt by. Either way public scrutiny would have been inevitable for the child eventually. The press would have found out sooner or later.

I mean really, this prince lied to her, intimidated her with his "people", hid her and Alexandre away - and who knows what else....They are not married, why should she be loyal to him, it seems all he does is hurt her! :(
I'm not saying Nicole is innocent either.

This is my opinion, don't freak out and outline all of Alberts actions because I am well aware of them!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises