Princess Märtha Louise & Durek Verrett: News & Information

[Soula]

Originally Posted by LadyFinn

Could Gwyneth Paltrow's love shaman ignite my energy field? JAN MOIR makes a date for enlightenment with a spiritual guru - but only gets pins, needles and a heap of hokum
Gwyneth Paltrow's love shaman tries to ignite JAN MOIR's energy field _ Daily Mail Online

Just when you think it can't get any worse.....

[Osipi]

I've been thinking about this and trying to figure out just why this roadshow of the Shaman and the Princess rubs me the wrong way so very much.

Its not up to me to question what they believe or what they don't believe in as I admire people that think outside the box and are open minded about things. If they've found total happiness in each other, more power to them if it is what is right for the both of them and they take the children into consideration. Even if its for a short time period that they've forged a path together, that's OK with me too as sometimes people come into our lives for a short time for the express purpose of being a "catalyst" or in other words, a learning lesson.

Martha Louise was born a Princess of Norway and that happened solely because of the family she was born into. Durek grew up with his family and their beliefs and their customs and those became a part of him. Together their beliefs seem to mesh with each other very well. That's great. For them.

I've come to the conclusion that what really bothers me the most is the peddling of their belief systems for profit. Its not because they're scamming the public or that they're turning themselves into a circus side show and dragging the Norwegian royal family into it as a connection but because they're treating the public like sheeple. Follow me and you'll find that yellow brick road that leads to the Emerald City.

It doesn't work that way. Truths in beliefs are very personal. There are no truths that are one size fits all. Spiritual paths are as unique to a person as their characters and personalities and their environmental experiences teach them. There isn't "the truth" out there. We all find our own truths as we go through life and even then, they're subject to change. Its called growth.

Although I may agree with some concepts these two present as their story, I think it should just remain their own story. A private story and not turn it into a method of pushing it on other people for lots and lots of green dollars. On the other hand, perhaps some people really need to experience their lifestyle to realize it doesn't fit as truth in their own lives. I do believe that in order to reject something, one needs to understand what it is that they're really rejecting.

There's no been there, done that and bought the aura/halo. Spiritual health is an ongoing process that takes many, many roads.

[LadyFinn]

Svensk Damtidning published in this week's issue the interview their reporter Anna von Koch made with the couple in Copenhagen.
Image Upper.com - Free Image Hosting - View Image
Image Upper.com - Free Image Hosting - View Image

[Muhler]

Thanks, LadyFinn.
These quotes deserve a translation.

-----------

Translation of quotes in an interview in Svensk Damtidning.
Interviewer: Anna von Koch.

ML: "Durek is my twin-soul. When I met him it felt like I had come home. Our souls recognized each other."

D: "When I looked into Märtha's eyes, I just felt - Wow. I knew and I felt something but I didn't have time to sit down and analyze what it was then and there."

They like to be home and among other things, play.
ML: "I have always been very playful (as in the way children play), but I have long kept it back. Now I like to climb trees with my children."

D: "It's important to be playful. Because if you stir the child within you you also get in contact with your creative energy."
He adds that they are fond of visiting escape-room together.
"I'm a big child! I play TV-games, draw, paint, lay puzzles and swing."

Durek don't have children of his own, but he has two nieces, whom he adores.

ML: "He is great with children and children loves him."

Some might find it a little daunting to date a Princess but not Durek.
D: "I grew up in an affluent and aristocratic family. My father, David Verrett, was an engineer, architect and multi-millionaire and we had the largest house there where we lived outside San Francisco. We had several houses, yachts and nannies and I always wore suits.
I was taught to draw, play the piano and saxophone and there were lots of rules: For example I was to be well-behaved and sit with my back straight. And that comes in handy now." - Winking to ML.

While other boys went to baseball with their dads, little Durek went with a male employee, while his father went to Wimbledon.
But Durek disliked the material abundance and he used to give away his weekly allowance to homeless he met.

D: "I couldn't stand the people in The Country Club who took delight in showing off their expensive watches. I wanted authenticity and that was the first of many things I liked about Märtha. She is not wearing a Rolex and she is not flaunting the fact that she is a princess. She is authentic.

Having described ML as strong, intelligent, playful and having a big heart, he goes on:
"Märtha has an ability to see straight through people and she has helped me finding deeper levels of myself."

ML lives in Norway, sharing the children with her ex, while Durek is in the process of buying a new home in Los Angeles, so it is hard to be separated:

D: "It's very challenging to have a long distance-relationship. It hurts."

ML: "I'd absolutely like to move in with Durek."

D: "You what!"

[ROYAL NORWAY]

First: Thanks to Muhler for keeping this thread updated with information!

Second: Well, I hope she is proud of what she's done, putting a 114-year-old institution (which now had record-high polling numbers), her 82-year-old parents and her brother and sister-in-law who are struggling with CP MM's health in a difficult situation, just because she had to go and use her title to make money with an extreme so-called ''shaman.'' But here she is smiling (link), hmm, and she seems to have much to smile about too, after cashing in money like an investment bank!!!

And beeeeeelive me, I'm going to write a loooong post about it in the coming days!!!

--------------------

BTW, the first poll has come out (link):
It was conducted by Norstat (known as one of the most serious research-companies in Norway) for NRK (The state-owned Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, which is the country's largest media organisation).

Numbers of people asked:
Total 897. Men 450. Women 447.

Bør kongen frata Märtha Louise prinsessetittelen?
Should The King strip Märtha Louise of her Princess-title?

Yes:
Total 25,4%. Men 30,9%. Women 19,8 %.

No:
Total 56%. Men 50,6%. Women 61,5%.

Don't know:
Total 18,6%. Men 18,5%. Women 18,7%.

Har Märtha Louises bruk av prinsessetittelen i markedsføringen av turneen med sjaman Durek Verrett påvirket ditt syn på kongehuset?
Has Märtha Louise's use of the princess-title in the marketing of the tour with Shaman Durek Verrett influenced your view of The Royal House?

Yes, in a negative direction:
Total 20,5%. Men 25,6%. Women 15,3%.

No, not affected:
Total 71,9%. Men 68,1%. Women 75,9%.

Yes, in a positive direction:
Total 2,3%. Men 1,8%. Women 2,7%.

Don't know:
Total 5,3%. Men 4,5%. Women 6,1%.


And then to two commentators, who were asked by NRK to give their opinions on these figures.

Professor (and former Rector) at Kristiania University College, Trond Blindheim (born 1955) said this: ''Gitt at det er nokså stor oppslutning om det norske kongehuset, så er tallene oppsiktsvekkende høye.
Mange mener jo at prinsessen åpner opp perspektiver som ikke er så tradisjonelle i forbindelse med kongehuset. Er ikke det et gode?
Mange vil se det som et gode, men når vi så på den undersøkelsen som blir presentert nå så var det bare to prosent som mente de hadde fått en oppløftende tro på henne og kongehuset etter dette hadde skjedd.''

Translated to: ''Given that there is quite a lot of support for the Norwegian royal house, the figures are remarkably high.
Many believe that The Princess opens up perspectives that are not as traditional in connection with the royal house. Isn't that a good thing?
Many will see it as a good thing, but when we look at the survey that is being presented now, only 2% meant they had got an uplifting belief in her and the royal house after this had happened.''

Political editor of the Liberal regional newspaper Fædrelandsvennen, Vidar Udjus (born 1965). That paper BTW went out on May 16th (as Muhler wrote in post 67) and called for Märtha to give up her title.
He had this to say: ''Det er ikke overraskende i lys av den sterke oppslutningen kongefamilien har blant folk flest. Vi synes det er viktig å reise prinsipielle debatter. Og jeg synes det også er interessant at såpass mange støtter det synspunktet vi har tatt til orde for.''
Translated to: ''It's not surprising in light of the strong support the royal family has among most people. We think it's important to conduct principal debates. And I also find it interesting that so many people support the point of view that we have advocated.''

And to those who wonder whether these two are pro-monarchy or not? Well, I don't know, but they have previously (in columns and stuff) seemed quite positive in their attitudes towards the institution.

So, was there anything else? Yes, what's ''MY'' take on these figures? Hmm, hmm, hmm:

*71,9% saying they are unaffected in their view of The Royal House is a ''surprisingly'' high number.
*20,5% saying they are affected in a negative direction towards the monarchy is (in contrast to what Professor Blindheim said) MUCH lower than what I had expected.

Why am I surprised? Because, although Märtha is no longer a member of the Royal House, she's still a Princess. - And therefore, everything she does affects the Monarchy. Another thing to mention is that from the relationship become known on May 12th and to end of ''The Princess and the Shaman'' tour on May 23rd, Norwegian television/news-sites/papers have been full of debates on the monarchy, especially TV2 News Channel, where several Republican politicians/commentators were given more airtime than I have ever seen.

And now to the princess-stuff:
*25,4 % saying she should lose the title is ''EXTREMELY and SURPRISINGLY'' low! Yes, even lower than in 2010, when this number was at 30,7% in an InFact poll for VG (that was the year she started using her title to teach paying people to speak with the dead).
*56% saying she should keep the title is way higher than what I thought it would be, yes, even more so than the 50,6% who said the same to InFact in 2010.

Why am I surprised? Because we're talking about a woman here who since 2007 has used her royal position to sell her ''spiritual-guidance'' (as she likes to call it) to paying people (many of them vulnerable), while at the same time whining about her ''terrible youth'' and how ''awful'' the *MEDIA* is to her. Yes, she means all the TV-shows/newspapers she *USES* (i.e. giving interviews several times a year) for everything it's worth to promote all this.

But anyway, I have to take up one last thing: And that is my disappointment at the fact that Norstat didn't even bother to ask the respondents (who answered these two questions) whether they saw themselves as monarchists or not, or which age-group they belonged to. Because that had really been interesting to see.

So let's think:
The monarchists (70-85% of the population): Most likely a large majority saying they are unaffected in their view of the monarchy, and a lesser majority who want Märtha to keep her title.

The Republicans (10-20% of the population): They probably couldn't care less, but due to their ''principles'' towards the institution, they are likely to use something like this to voice their opinion even more. So, therefore, most likely a large majority saying they are affected in a negative direction towards the monarchy. And due to the same reasons, also a large majority for Märtha to lose her title.

Younger people: In Norway (at least, according to a Norstat poll for NRK in 2017, which is in contrast to some of the other European monarchies), it's those between 30-39 (85%) and those under 30 (82%) who are most supportive of the monarchy. And since that age-group is known to be ''non-conservative and modern,'' they are most likely to have fewer problems with Märtha using her title commercially, even when it comes to her spiritual stuff.
Have heard some of them say:
''She's brave, modern, fresh, cool,'' etc.
''She must have something to live of.''
''It's cool to get a black guy in the RF'' (I agree, that is ''cool,'' but it's not what this is about!).
And therefore, it's likely to be a large majority saying they are unaffected in their view of the monarchy and that they want Märtha to keep her title.
Yes, and being 30 myself, I'm not affected in my view on the institution either. But when it comes to the title: Well, IMO, she shouldn't use it commercially. - And if she refuses to stop doing so, then she should, indeed, be stripped of it!

Older people: Much more conservative, especially those over 70. And the 70/80/90-year-olds I know are pretty shocked! LOL.
So, a large majority of them is most likely affected in a negative direction towards the monarchy, and even more so when it comes to Märtha keeping her title.

BTW, in my next post (yes, the one I mentioned at the beginning), I will take the time to answer some of the earlier questions here.

[Alisa]

Has anyone verified Durek's claim of being affluent?
In this day and age people can easily fact-check information people say.
For him to say he grew up in an affluent family that had several houses and yachts...that all sounds too good and too made up.
I'm sceptical!

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY

BTW, the first poll has come out (link):
It was conducted by Norstat (known as one of the most serious research-companies in Norway) for NRK (The state-owned Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, which is the country's largest media organisation).

Numbers of people asked:
Total 897. Men 450. Women 447.

Bør kongen frata Märtha Louise prinsessetittelen?
Should The King strip Märtha Louise of her Princess-title?

Yes:
Total 25,4%. Men 30,9%. Women 19,8 %.

No:
Total 56%. Men 50,6%. Women 61,5%.

Don't know:
Total 18,6%. Men 18,5%. Women 18,7%.

[...]

And now to the princess-stuff:
*25,4 % saying she should lose the title is ''EXTREMELY and SURPRISINGLY'' low! Yes, even lower than in 2010, when this number was at 30,7% in an InFact poll for VG (that was the year she started using her title to teach paying people to speak with the dead).
*56% saying she should keep the title is way higher than what I thought it would be, yes, even more so than the 50,6% who said the same to InFact in 2010.

Why am I surprised? Because we're talking about a woman here who since 2007 has used her royal position to sell her ''spiritual-guidance'' (as she likes to call it) to paying people (many of them vulnerable), while at the same time whining about her ''terrible youth'' and how ''awful'' the *MEDIA* is to her. Yes, she means all the TV-shows/newspapers she *USES* (i.e. giving interviews several times a year) for everything it's worth to promote all this.

It is not entirely surprising to me that the percentage who say she should lose the title is low. Tradition holds much weight in a mainly ceremonial monarchy, and stripping the title would institute a considerable change from European traditions (traditionally, it was common for even the worst of kings to keep their titles).

It is more surprising that the percentage saying she should keep the title has risen from 2010. I suppose that many people, in particular the voters who reached their majority after 2010 and grew up hearing about Princess Märtha Louise's angel school, have grown accustomed to her commercial strategies and self-promotion and do not see a major difference between her "lessons" and Mr. Verrett's.

Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY

But anyway, I have to take up one last thing: And that is my disappointment at the fact that Norstat didn't even bother to ask the respondents (who answered these two questions) whether they saw themselves as monarchists or not, or which age-group they belonged to. Because that had really been interesting to see.

I would have liked to see a question as to if Princess Märtha Louise should be using her title in this manner.

Originally Posted by ROYAL NORWAY

Yes, in a negative direction:
Total 20,5%. Men 25,6%. Women 15,3%.

No, not affected:
Total 71,9%. Men 68,1%. Women 75,9%.

Yes, in a positive direction:
Total 2,3%. Men 1,8%. Women 2,7%.

Don't know:
Total 5,3%. Men 4,5%. Women 6,1%.


And then to two commentators, who were asked by NRK to give their opinions on these figures.

Professor (and former Rector) at Kristiania University College, Trond Blindheim (born 1955) said this: ''Gitt at det er nokså stor oppslutning om det norske kongehuset, så er tallene oppsiktsvekkende høye.
Mange mener jo at prinsessen åpner opp perspektiver som ikke er så tradisjonelle i forbindelse med kongehuset. Er ikke det et gode?
Mange vil se det som et gode, men når vi så på den undersøkelsen som blir presentert nå så var det bare to prosent som mente de hadde fått en oppløftende tro på henne og kongehuset etter dette hadde skjedd.''

Translated to: ''Given that there is quite a lot of support for the Norwegian royal house, the figures are remarkably high.
Many believe that The Princess opens up perspectives that are not as traditional in connection with the royal house. Isn't that a good thing?
Many will see it as a good thing, but when we look at the survey that is being presented now, only 2% meant they had got an uplifting belief in her and the royal house after this had happened.''

Yes, the figures suggest that Princess Märtha Louise is seen as irrelevant to the monarchy rather than an asset to it.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by Alisa

Has anyone verified Durek's claim of being affluent?
In this day and age people can easily fact-check information people say.
For him to say he grew up in an affluent family that had several houses and yachts...that all sounds too good and too made up.
I'm sceptical!

Me too!

I think he comes across as someone with a immature wish not to stand in the shadow of ML.
The largest house in the neighborhood - read: on the road.
Several yachts. Yes, but not on the same time and probably more like larger motorboats at best.
Several houses. Read: moved several times, which is not unusual for an architect involved in building projects in different places in the country and for extended periods.
Show-offs in the "country club". Well, it's my impression that if you are a member of a true "country club" you are so wealthy you don't have to show off how wealthy you are. The membership is enough.

I think it's plausible he father was a successful contractor and earned very good money and that our Durek lived a very comfortable life during his childhood. It is my clear impression, reading between the lines, that Durek did not have a close, perhaps not even loving relationship with his father. Partly, I guess, because of work and partly because being an architect/engineer, you tend to be more rational and practical thinking than Durek surely is. I don't think the two ever understood each other. I also suspecte that his father was pretty demanding and tried to instill in his son some discipline (suit, sit up straight!) and that Durek probably disappointed his father.
I think it's very obvious Durek leaned much more towards his mother and her family and that he missed a loving father-figure in his life. Why else, out of the blue, mention that his father did not take him to baseball matches?
He refers repeatedly to his mother in loving tones, but not his father.

He also seem - shall we say - a bit naive.

It makes me wonder... But time will tell, whether I'm right.
It is increasingly my impression from reading the interviews that someone is being taken for a ride!
The readers? Few will fall for that one!
One of our two turtle-doves? But which one? Both can benefit from this relationship, at least for a period, so both have an interest in this relationship.
But then I'm an old cynic.

- Thanks, Royal Norway.
Most interesting figures.

What I read from the figures is that most people really don't care about ML and that they do not find her important enough for her antics to harm the monarchy.
She's the eccentric aunt. Annoying and irritating at times, sometimes entertaining but otherwise relegated to the periphery. An: "Oh well, that's aunt Märtha for you." if you get my meaning.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Muhler

Thanks, LadyFinn.
These quotes deserve a translation.

-----------

Translation of quotes in an interview in Svensk Damtidning.
Interviewer: Anna von Koch.

D: "I couldn't stand the people in The Country Club who took delight in showing off their expensive watches. I wanted authenticity and that was the first of many things I liked about Märtha. She is not wearing a Rolex and she is not flaunting the fact that she is a princess. She is authentic.

Bold by me. Flaunting her princess title is exactly what both of them are doing in their scam for money. I haven't decided if ML is just naive and searching for happiness in all the wrong places or aware of what is going on and okay with it because she is "in love", but he is an opportunist.

[Moonmaiden23]

A person of genuine wealth and breeding ..not to mention education...would NEVER describe his upbringing as "aristocratic" and then proceed to boast about having nannies and boats as well as the " biggest house on the block"...just...no.

I really hope this phase will pass....

[wartenberg7]

There does not seem to be any news worth reporting about the NRF right now except this...!
It´s such a disgrace that the continous good work of TM and the CP couple is totally overshadowed by this story - and I don´t completely blame the Princess for that. It´s the scandal hungry media and those of us who are mainly interested in royal love life who keep this machinery running.

[LadyFinn]

Yesterday they have been in Mind Studio, London. Shaman posted photos to his Facebook

Last night @remindstudio was on fire with Lit students learning Soul Talk. Here I am with my Goddess @princessmarthalouise thanks to all the beautiful souls that came out for themselves to see how much power they have inside.
Life is a sacred dance back to yourself. Every step is a step inward - Shaman Durek
London Tribe there are still events in the #unitedkingdom check out my #linkstzer on my page for more events.
How do you talk to your soul?
https://scontent-arn2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...53&oe=5D8AF129
https://scontent-arn2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...22&oe=5D9C60F8
https://scontent-arn2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...cb&oe=5D9AF607

Svensk Damtidning's article about their reporter Anna von Koch attending Shaman and Märtha Louise's "workshop".
Image Upper.com - Free Image Hosting - View Image
Image Upper.com - Free Image Hosting - View Image

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

(1) It is not entirely surprising to me that the percentage who say she should lose the title is low. Tradition holds much weight in a mainly ceremonial monarchy, and stripping the title would institute a considerable change from European traditions (traditionally, it was common for even the worst of kings to keep their titles).

(2) It is more surprising that the percentage saying she should keep the title has risen from 2010. I suppose that many people, in particular the voters who reached their majority after 2010 and grew up hearing about Princess Märtha Louise's angel school, have grown accustomed to her commercial strategies and self-promotion and do not see a major difference between her "lessons" and Mr. Verrett's.

1. Well, considering how controversial she is (due to the stuff I mentioned in my previous post), I do in fact find it surprising!! And as you probably know by now, Norwegians aren't exactly known to be fussed about tradition.
2. As a so-called ''presseekspert'' (press-expert) said it on television the other day, ''when a person is under attack from the media, people tend to be more sympathetic.'' - Which, IMO, was what we saw with Märtha in 2010 (heavily criticised for using her title to promote her courses about ''talking with the dead'') and now in 2019 (heavily criticised for using her title to promote her spiritual tour with a controversial and extreme ''Shaman''). Because polls between 2008 (the year after she started her ''angel-school'') and 2015, where the question was asked without her being under a media storm, showed less support for her to keep it (around 30%).



--------------------

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

Yes, the figures suggest that Princess Märtha Louise is seen as irrelevant to the monarchy rather than an asset to it.

Originally Posted by Muhler

What I read from the figures is that most people really don't care about ML and that they do not find her important enough for her antics to harm the monarchy.

Hmm, although she is ''irrelevant'' to the monarchy as an institution, she is the King's princess-titled daughter. And previous polls (conducted during the last two decades) have actually shown that a majority of people have an opinion of what she's doing.
So, why isn't she more damaging to The Royal House?
Well, probably because most sensible people wouldn't turn their back on a ''pretty amazing'' monarch and 114-years with history and pride, just because of the King's non-working-royal daughter. I mean, we're talking about an institution here that symbolises our independence:
*Prince Carl of Denmark being elected by the Norwegian people as constitutional monarch of an independent Norway in 1905, taking the name of Haakon VII, and who later became known for his ''NO'' to Hitler. He died in 1957 as King Haakon the Great (as VG wrote it on their front page at the time). Yes, and due to a movie and an upcoming tv-series, almost everyone knows who he is (read about it in this thread - link).
*King Olav V and CP Märtha (there is planned a tv-series about her too BTW, read about it in the same link), also known for their WWII efforts, and he for his service as monarch from 1957 and until his death in 1991.
*And King Harald V, known for his widely praised ''inspirational'' speeches (some of which he writes himself) and his equally praised efforts as a symbol during national crises.



--------------------

Originally Posted by Muhler

She's the eccentric aunt. Annoying and irritating at times, sometimes entertaining but otherwise relegated to the periphery. An: "Oh well, that's aunt Märtha for you." if you get my meaning.

After 12-years with controversy, most people are just saying: ''Oh, she again,'' and that is on a day to day basis. But when she is doing something controversial (such as promoting a new spiritual project, etc), people still tend to care, either by going against her or by supporting her.

--------------------

BTW, another poll:
It was conducted by Ipsos for the Republican and left-winged tabloid, Dagbladet.

Bør Märtha gi fra seg prinsessetittelen?
Should Märtha give up the princess-title?

No, 50% (33% in 2015).
Yes, 32% (the same number as in 2015).
No opinion, 17% (35% in 2015).

And except that the questions this time were asked by phone and not online like 4 years ago, no further information was provided.

[Muhler]

Thanks, LadyFinn.

It's one of Svensk Damtidnings reporters who went to a session with Shaman and ML, and describes in details what went on and what effect it had on her personally.
- Reading it I seriously wonder if these people don't really deserve being parted with their money! If these people find - gratification or whatever it is - in such a seance and are willing to pay expensive money for that, well why not? Sometimes I really want to be

But do you want to a read translation? Think carefully! You are guaranteed a headache.

[Osipi]

Its often said that a fool and his money are soon parted. Question is how does a fool get the money to begin with?

But seriously, I think a translation of what is involved in this workshop can only serve to show perhaps how people are being led down the proverbial garden path. Knowledge is power and if it prevents just one person from being taken in by this kind of spiel, its worth it.

Workshops like this are a dime a dozen here in the States and there's always a hook that draws people in. As I've said before, one needs to know exactly what something is before they decide they're going to accept it or reject it. There are legitimate workshops out there and retreats for spiritual health but "How to be a shaman for only $24,356.07. Food included" is questionable at least to me.

It just really, really bugs me when I see spirituality for sale.

[victor1319]

Here in Germany there is this youtube-and-tv-show "Kalkofe". The this named comedian makes fun of the tv-personalities and one of his main targets is "Astro-TV": Imagine the shaman in different versions 24 hours a day - that is their program!

But many people fall for this and pay a lot of money for talking to their dead aunts and stuff, clairvoyants, whatever.

And this is life: The stupid always will be discriminated against! Everywhere, all the time!

And to the audiance of the "Princess and the Shaman": I wonder, if they are the victims... or if this is something for their vitae, so they can hold their own work shops, now that they have been enlightend by the Princess and the Shaman.

You know: A big Pyramid Game, a Ponzi scheme of "Spirituality"!

But a Princess, which gets involved in this, that is a scandal!

[Muhler]

Found it, Victor1319.

I don't know what I think is most amusing, the real Astroshow or the parody!
In fact I feel more like crying.

My first reaction was: That's a set-up!
And then: The host is sitting there lying through her teeth to a person, who is grieving for a lost relative, whom she believe she has seen in vision!!
How can you avoid being crucified (pardon the pun) by the public for doing that?!?
Yeah, yeah, the astro-host may provide comfort I can hear someone argue, but in my book that is deeply immoral.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpoXHtMh5DE

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

It is not entirely surprising to me that the percentage who say she should lose the title is low. Tradition holds much weight in a mainly ceremonial monarchy, and stripping the title would institute a considerable change from European traditions (traditionally, it was common for even the worst of kings to keep their titles).

It is more surprising that the percentage saying she should keep the title has risen from 2010. I suppose that many people, in particular the voters who reached their majority after 2010 and grew up hearing about Princess Märtha Louise's angel school, have grown accustomed to her commercial strategies and self-promotion and do not see a major difference between her "lessons" and Mr. Verrett's.



I would have liked to see a question as to if Princess Märtha Louise should be using her title in this manner.




Yes, the figures suggest that Princess Märtha Louise is seen as irrelevant to the monarchy rather than an asset to it.

Prince or Princess are titles acquired by birth. It is unusual to be stripped of a princely title except, in the past in Denmark and Sweden, for unequal marriages. I actually find the percentage of respondents who favor stripping ML of her title quite high (25 %) considering how unusual that would be.

[Muhler]

Okay, let's learn what Svensk Damtidning's reporter had to say about the session with Shaman, she took part in.
Courtesy of the scans, LadyFinn, kindly provided for us.

The reporter, Anna von Koch, decided to follow the whole thing with an open mind.
It started with everyone being told to breathe deeply while tapping two fingers against their wrists.
Then Sham calls on good spirits and angels and opens a gate to the universe that will fill everyone with love and power. And here some begin to sob while others laugh hysterically.
The whole thing clearly has an effect on the around 50 presents. Some begin to rock back and forth on their chairs while others move their heads in a circle like in a trance.
A man howls like a wolf while a woman pretends to give birth.
The reporter actually finds it upsetting when a woman sitting behind her begins to growl like a lion.

The purpose is to find your true self and the reporter admits that Shaman has a strong charisma, preaching to those present to "take in the light."
When he tells those present to get rid of their bad energies, some begin to shake and cough. The reporter finds it intensive, like someone suffocating.

The reporter tries to go along, drumming away and breathing deeply - yet, she feels nothing. Looking around she notice she is not only one, being unaffected. Shaman notice that as well.
He doesn't blame anyone though. He explains that the road to the true self is different for different people. He tells the reporter that it is the will of the spirits that she remains calm.

After the session some are crying quietly and others are hugging each other.

The session lasted three hours and the reporter noticed that Shaman was heard and seen more during the session (he filled the room) while ML was more analytical and reasoning.

The reporter ends by concluding that the session was enriching and that it was interesting to hear the wisdom of life from both Shaman and ML.
It is a course in love, patience and respect.

- I will add that this is of course a quid pro quo. Svensk Damtidning gets this exclusive as well as an interview - in return they are not too critical.

And on another note: ML's "angel school" is that equivalent to the post above in which Astroshow lie to people about being in contact with their dead relatives?
In other words: Is ML claiming to be in contact with dead people on behalf of grieving relatives? Even if her "message" is reassuring.

[victor1319]

Originally Posted by Muhler

In other words: Is ML claiming to be in contact with dead people on behalf of grieving relatives? Even if her "message" is reassuring.

Her former partner in business talked the same stuff like the Shaman, but without the "ancestors". This is called New Age...
https://youtu.be/Vyd6jt1lB2E
skip to minute 11:00 (may be I skipped the good stuff...)

There are other vids to find on youtube with "märtha Luise angel school" and they are all in nowegian... So, no, I can't answer your question.

But anyway, do we really want to find out?