Princess Märtha Louise & Durek Verrett: News & Information 2019 -

[Somebody]

If something were to happen to Haakon, Ingrid Alexandra and Sverre Magnus, surly Norway would rather be a republic alla Finland and Iceland, no matter if ML were to marry Durek or anyone else.

And when it comes to the King giving his consent or not, well, Märtha is very unlikely to become monarch anyway, and if she does, then I think the Storting would actually start the process of making Norway a republic.

So, you are both saying the line to the throne is completely meaningless? Because it doesn't matter who is in it or not (except for the crown prince and his family)?

 

[Hans-Rickard]

If something were to happen to Haakon, Ingrid Alexandra and Sverre Magnus, surly Norway would rather be a republic alla Finland and Iceland, no matter if ML were to marry Durek or anyone else.

Märtha Louise’s 3 daughters are in the line of succession as well… They are last in the queue yes and very unlikely to ever land on the throne. But as long as they are there, Norway have accepted the chance that one of them may end up becoming Queen…

Why have them in the line of succession otherwise ?

 

[Annine]

So, you are both saying the line to the throne is completely meaningless? Because it doesn't matter who is in it or not (except for the crown prince and his family)?

Yes, I think the way to the republic would be short, I dont think any new country would choose a heriditary system in 2024 if they should establish a new way of goverment.

But because of the history, the fact that we know the royal family, have grown up with them, they behave and try to do their best to serve the country, many like them and feel like they "know them", we continue with this un-logical system.

But if the whole core family was wiped out I think the interest in having ML and her reality family as a head of state is not great. A family that is mostly concerned with promoting themselves, that shows litle regard for the way their life-choices impact the rest of the royal family and how they make their life difficult, I think the closet-republicans would jump out both in Stortinget and in many homes. We see how popular the elected presidents in Iceland and Finland are, two well run countries that are close to us.

I dont think there would be much interest in Queen Leonore in Sweden or King Henrik in Denmark either to be frank, Queen Eloise in the NL? or King Archie in the UK? King Froilan in Spain?

So personally I think the rest of the sucession is merely theoretical in this modern age.

 

[LadyFinn]

Durek's mom shocked
- Maybe they see through him now?
- I don't understand how he can be so rude and disrespectful towards his future in-laws, says Durek's own mother.
Dureks mamma sjokker_ Dronning Sonja kan ikke tilgi dette
Translation

 

[Toledo]

Ok, it took me weeks of reading all your posts to chime in with my opinion, so here is it and I'll be blunt:

Durek/Darek is just like any of the legions of con artists that populate the Hollywood society. Parasites that find their way from one minor celebrity to a big name one to offer anything that, like a good drug dealer, make them dependent on the scheme.
We have in the news predatory people that hunt down celebrities with offers of speaking to the family ghosts, tarot experts and fashion and health 'gurus'.

All they have to do is tell the right lies to a gullible celebrity, or a princess involved in the Paltrow circles, and enter into their lives as a personal assistant or love interest. It's all a predatory game.

In Durek's case, because he happens to be from a different race, he uses this as a weapon to shame anyone that doesn't buy the scam he's selling. It's what they call a game of smoke and mirrors where he distracts you with his victim status while using his celebrity princess to access more and more credibility on his business.

If Martha decided or was told to relinquish her title, just her title and not her kids', Durek would drop her in no time and ask for a substantial alimony. Durek will claim it was because of prejudice and everything under the sun to exploit his victim status and sell more of whatever he does.

From my view, the problem is not him, it's Martha. Her need to have a person like Durek attached to her tells a lot of what's in her head. And the lack of common sense of how this affects her family gives me a feeling she is spoiled, sensation-seeking and entitled not able to see the big picture that she, and her family, represent a nation. The actions of a royal prince or princess reflect on the rest of the family.

So, congratulations on the nuptials and for Durek, I hope you get the biggest future alimony checks in the history of Norway. You deserve every minted Krone there is.

Sorry if the above was harsh and blunt, but that's how I see it when celebrities get entangled with the notorious Los Angeles elite of scammers, celebrity stalkers and health gurus.

 

[Granada]

Toledo. Well said.
My fear is that Durek might be setting this whole "con game' in motion to fail. Purposely. Not as just a culture clash, but the explosive Racism Angle.

So that he can publicize and monetize it in the States. Big money. A documentary, talk show circuit and a book. All at the expense of The Norwegian Royal Family and The Norwegian People.

I honestly could very well see him perpetrating this fraud. There honestly does NOT seem to be much, or anything genuine about him. Durek is user. Even his former Boyfriend, Hank Greenburg who was with him from 2007-2015 said he was manipulative. Said other things like " dangerous " but that could be sour grapes.

I don't have any good feelings about this working out well for anyone, except perhaps the Shaman Con man.
And Martha Louise should be ashamed.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

So, you are both saying the line to the throne is completely meaningless? Because it doesn't matter who is in it or not (except for the crown prince and his family)?

What I'm saying is that Märtha is unlikely to come to the throne anyway! And therefore, her succession right is not that important.

And for the King to not give his consent would be pretty weird here in Norway. I mean, we're a liberal and modern country, and a father trying to interfere in which man his 52-year-old daughter should marry will most likely be met with quite some criticism here.

And in contrast to her succession right, the princess-title binds Märtha and Durek to the monarchy on a daily basis. So much more important for her to renounce the title than losing a succession right that doesn't mean that much anyway.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I understand those who say that Princess Märtha Louise is unlikely to become Queen and that if it were to happen the Storting would begin to reform the Constitution to abolish the monarchy. But as things stand, if one tragic family accident were to occur, Norway would automatically have a Queen Märtha Louise and (assuming consent is granted and the marriage takes place as expected) Prince Consort Durek for at least as long as it took for the political parties to reach political agreement on the structure of a Republic and any other related constitutional changes (which is very unlikely to be simple or quick; see the experiences of Australia or Spain), followed by the actual procedure of rewriting the Constitution.

And personally, given that the government is unwilling to block the princess from a possible queenship even at this moment - when there is an extremely simple method to accomplish it (advising the King not to grant his official consent) and the princess is not expecting to assume the throne anyway (so it would make little practical difference to her), I would not place my bets on the government being willing to remove her when she would already be sitting on the throne and acting as the head of state day to day and the process of removing her would be much more politically and constitutionally complex.

I do think Princess Märtha Louise's right to the throne has importance. The King and Government's seeming unwillingness to remove it from her proves it. If her right to the throne was inconsequential, removing it would be an easy and painless addition to the list of ways she and her family have attempted to distance her from the monarchy, but apparently the king, the government, and/or the public do consider it important for the King to actively grant his consent to the marriage to preserve the possibility of Queen Märtha Louise.

And for the King to not give his consent would be pretty weird here in Norway. I mean, we're a liberal and modern country, and a father trying to interfere in which man his 52-year-old daughter should marry will most likely be met with quite some criticism here.

Durek Verrett and many observers would indeed perceive or present it as "a father trying to interfere in which man his 52-year-old daughter should marry", and that is an important consideration. But, as you and most of us here know, the truth is that withholding the King's constitutional consent to a royal marriage under article 36 of the Constitution (he could still grant his personal consent as a father) would not deprive a couple of the right to marry, and they would have the legal rights equal to any other couple married under Norwegian law, so there is no interference with the right to marry. The only consequence is that the possibility of a (for example) Queen Märtha Louise and Prince Consort Durek would be taken away.

This is why I have argued that monarchies such as Norway ought to reform the wording of their royal marriage laws. The traditional legal phrases such as "may not marry without the consent of the King" give the impression that royal couples may be denied the right to legally marry, when in actuality the only right they may be denied under these laws is the right to become the Head of State and First Lady/First Gentleman of their country.

 

[hereditarytitles]

And personally, given that the government is unwilling to block the princess from a possible queenship even at this moment - when there is an extremely simple method to accomplish it (advising the King not to grant his official consent) and the princess is not expecting to assume the throne anyway (so it would make little practical difference to her), I would not place my bets on the government being willing to remove her when she would already be sitting on the throne and acting as the head of state day to day and the process of removing her would be much more politically and constitutionally complex.

I do think Princess Märtha Louise's right to the throne has importance. The King and Government's seeming unwillingness to remove it from her proves it. If her right to the throne was inconsequential, removing it would be an easy and painless addition to the list of ways she and her family have attempted to distance her from the monarchy, but apparently the king, the government, and/or the public do consider it important for the King to actively grant his consent to the marriage to preserve the possibility of Queen Märtha Louise.


Durek Verrett and many observers would indeed perceive or present it as "a father trying to interfere in which man his 52-year-old daughter should marry", and that is an important consideration. But, as you and most of us here know, the truth is that withholding the King's constitutional consent to a royal marriage under article 36 of the Constitution (he could still grant his personal consent as a father) would not deprive a couple of the right to marry, and they would have the legal rights equal to any other couple married under Norwegian law, so there is no interference with the right to marry. The only consequence is that the possibility of a (for example) Queen Märtha Louise and Prince Consort Durek would be taken away.



This is why I have argued that monarchies such as Norway ought to reform the wording of their royal marriage laws. The traditional legal phrases such as "may not marry without the consent of the King" give the impression that royal couples may be denied the right to legally marry, when in actuality the only right they may be denied under these laws is the right to become the Head of State and First Lady/First Gentleman of their country.

Very well said! I am still wondering how the Norwegian Court has not reacted so far with the really outrageous remarks of Durek recently, and Märtha just stays silent...

An example how it has been done is the GD Court of Luxembourg. Although in Norway there are no children involved still:

When Louis, and he was only third in line, got Tessy pregnant, him being just 18 and her a soldier at 19, the GDC after a while decided to let them marry after the child was born but they made a decision that Louis had to give up his succession rights as well the rights for his sons.
That was a clear decision and everybody accepted it.

And nobody ever complained.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

I understand those who say that Princess Märtha Louise is unlikely to become Queen and that if it were to happen the Storting would begin to reform the Constitution to abolish the monarchy. But as things stand, if one tragic family accident were to occur, Norway would automatically have a Queen Märtha Louise and (assuming consent is granted and the marriage takes place as expected) Prince Consort Durek for at least as long as it took for the political parties to reach political agreement on the structure of a Republic and any other related constitutional changes (which is very unlikely to be simple or quick; see the experiences of Australia or Spain), followed by the actual procedure of rewriting the Constitution.

Yes, as I've written before, to make Norway a republic today would be extremely difficult, almost undoable!
But with Märtha and Durek on the throne, not so much!
Pretty sure almost the whole Storting would be in agreement to do something pretty quickly. Most likely coming to an agreement with her of an abdication (but that is a discussion for another thread).

I do think Princess Märtha Louise's right to the throne has importance. The King and Government's seeming unwillingness to remove it from her proves it. If her right to the throne was inconsequential, removing it would be an easy and painless addition to the list of ways she and her family have attempted to distance her from the monarchy, but apparently the king, the government, and/or the public do consider it important for the King to actively grant his consent to the marriage to preserve the possibility of Queen Märtha Louise.

The King and the government wouldn't IMO even have thought about not giving consent because, as the court has already told the media, ''the King and Queen don't decide whom Märtha marries.''
I mean, this is Norway in 2024, there is no way that the King or the government would go anywhere near Article 36!

And again, Märtha going around being a princess is IMO the big issue here, not that she has a very small chance of becoming Queen!

??

 

[akina21]

Very well said! I am still wondering how the Norwegian Court has not reacted so far with the really outrageous remarks of Durek recently, and Märtha just stays silent...

An example how it has been done is the GD Court of Luxembourg. Although in Norway there are no children involved still:

When Louis, and he was only third in line, got Tessy pregnant, him being just 18 and her a soldier at 19, the GDC after a while decided to let them marry after the child was born but they made a decision that Louis had to give up his succession rights as well the rights for his sons.
That was a clear decision and everybody accepted it.

And nobody ever complained.

There is a difference between a teen pregnancy and a sketchy con artist hanging onto your daughter.

 

[Somebody]

There is a difference between a teen pregnancy and a sketchy con artist hanging onto your daughter.

Most would find the latter more concerning...

The easiest way (if possible under Norwegian constitution) would be for Märtha Louise herself to not ask for approval or for her to give up her rights to the throne upon/before marriage. What is the official process for asking for approval (is only the king involved; or also parliament - as some referenced the Storting?) and is there a way to give up rights to the throne (preferably without her daughters losing their rights as well) except for entering into an unapproved marriage?

There is a huge difference between formal approval and private approval. There is no doubt in anyone's mind that -then- queen Beatrix was very much in favor of the marriage between Friso and Mabel; nonetheless, in the end it was decided that it was better not to ask for formal approval from parliament. This is even clearer in the case of her nephews; nobody was against them marrying their respective wives; however, formal approval wasn't recommended - and therefore requested - as they would lose their place in line to the throne upon the ascension of the throne by their cousin anyway.

In this case, if there is any possibility under Norwegian Law and Märtha Louise has the best interest of the monarchy in mind, she would understand that the best course of action for the monarchy would be for her to be removed from the line of succession.

 

[victor1319]

If Princess Märtha Louise is no longer in the line of succession... Wil she be then a Princess still?

I could imagine, this title if of great value to her (and maybe even more to The Shaman...).

 

[Elizaveta]

If Princess Märtha Louise is no longer in the line of succession... Wil she be then a Princess still?

I could imagine, this title if of great value to her (and maybe even more to The Shaman...).

Having a (prince/ss) title and being in line of succession are two completely separate things.

 

[hereditarytitles]

There is a difference between a teen pregnancy and a sketchy con artist hanging onto your daughter.

My intention wasn't to compare reasons for a monarch's decision to exclude a member from his right of succession. I only said that decisions like that have been made and been accepted.

 

[Mariane de Dania]

Having a (prince/ss) title and being in line of succession are two completely separate things.

King Harald must be the monarch now and not the father. For the good of the realm and for the future of the Royal House of Norway. No approval of this disastrous match! If he cannot or will not, then the government must intervene.
Marry him, if you cannot live without him, but then you will no longer be in the line of succession.
ML's behaviour is "conduct unbecoming" and has been for years. Her light o' love is absolutely unsuitable. A self-serving snakeoil-seller with a more than chequered past.
IMHO he's nae fit for the company o' decent fowk!
[I cannot help wondering how many "ordinary" families would welcome a person like him as SIL/BIL.]
This match is going to end in tears and [more] scandals.

 

[Somebody]

If Princess Märtha Louise is no longer in the line of succession... Wil she be then a Princess still?

I could imagine, this title if of great value to her (and maybe even more to The Shaman...).

Her aunts were never in line to the throne but always remained princesses (but lost their predicate of royal highness upon marriage - which she already gave up as well). ML herself wasnn't in line to the throne either for the first two decades of her life but was still a princess, while her daughters are in line to the throne without being princesses.

 

[Granada]

Since Durek and his enabler Martha Louise, seemingly have no interest in keeping a low profile, let alone NOT mouthing off about VERY controversial hot button subjects, it would be in The Family's interest to distance themselves. I don't really see taking her out of the line of Succession or removing her Princess title is an option.

Invite them to private events, but public outings with press coverage ? Nope.
Other than the upcoming Wedding. Which is going to be tricky in any case.

Yes, The Wedding is in August, hopefully make it clear it will be a scaled downed Event. I think Martha AND Durek however want ALL the whistle and bells.

Who attends ??? Man, that Guest List of Royals and-or Gwyneth Paltrow. Can't wait to see how this all plays out.

After that, start making sure their time in public with The Family is greatly limited. Send a clear message. Since these Two believe that they don't have to abide by rules or norms.

Just my opinion.

 

[Prinsara]

Invite them to private events, but public outings with press coverage ? Nope.
…

After that, start making sure their time in public with The Family is greatly limited. Send a clear message. Since these Two believe that they don't have to abide by rules or norms.

Just my opinion.

Norway is a really small place and doesn’t allow for much emotional distancing, especially from someone who is known as part of a close family.

Even if they move to California, things they do and say will reflect back. Maybe not with great impact, but they will.

I don’t think it’s an option.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The easiest way (if possible under Norwegian constitution) would be for Märtha Louise herself to not ask for approval or for her to give up her rights to the throne upon/before marriage. What is the official process for asking for approval (is only the king involved; or also parliament - as some referenced the Storting?) and is there a way to give up rights to the throne (preferably without her daughters losing their rights as well) except for entering into an unapproved marriage?

I think the following two posts are relevant:

And then to the constitutional stuff:

According to the then Prime Minister, Jens Stoltenberg, the King called him to the palace before the engagement - and informed him that Haakon wanted to marry MM.
He told the PM that he knew about Article 36 in the Constitution, which states:

A Prince or Princess entitled to succeed to the Crown of Norway may not marry without the consent of the King. Nor may he or she accept any other crown or government without the consent of the King and the Storting. For the consent of the Storting two thirds of the votes are required.

If he or she acts contrary to this rule, they and their descendants forfeit their right to the throne of Norway.

He explained that he understood that when the word "King" is written in the Constitution, it had to be interpreted as "the King in Council of State'' (which, today, means the government).

But after that, the King said the following: ''Men akkurat når det gjelder denne paragrafen om at kongen må godkjenne kronprinsens ekteskap, vil jeg mene at kongen faktisk er kongen, det vil si meg – og ikke deg''.
("But just when it comes to this Article about that the King must approve the Crown Prince's marriage, I would think that the King is actually the King, that means me - and not you.")

And then it was done, neither Stoltenberg nor any other prime minister could do anything about it.

This is an interesting analysis from Dag T. Hoelseth, a Norwegian royal historian, regarding the debate over the King's prerogative to remove titles and apanages.

The Constitution of Norway Article 34 says that "The King shall make provisions concerning titles for those who are entitled to succeed to the Crown."

However, at the time Princess Märtha Louise was born, the article read: "The nearest heir to the Throne, if he is the son of the reigning King, shall bear the title of Crown Prince. The other persons entitled to succeed to the Throne shall be called Princes, and the daughters of the Royal House, Princesses."

So the first question would be if "the King" in this situation means the king in person or "the King in Council" (i.e. government). One leading constitutional expert, Arne Fliflet, belives it is the former. Another question is whether the original reading could give the title more "protection" than the present reading. One thing is for sure, if the government asks the king to do something about the title, he will certainly oblige. I don't think this is very realistic at the moment. Before the princess gave up her apanage (from 1 January 2002), the interpretation in the Ministry of Justice was that she would have to give it up personally, it couldn't be taken away from her by force (cf. my "Report on the Norwegian Royal House's civil list and the state-owned properties at its disposial", 2001). She was kindly asked to give it up and she obliged. I think there is a parallell to the title issue, as it also derives from the Constitution. It is easier to give something than to take away something. Generally, there is little precedence on the matter, so one should be careful about being too categorial about what could happen or not.

I think the princess has got the point and will be more careful in the future.

Regarding the last question, the answer is a definite no. The Constitution forbids the creation of new nobility. The king only has the right to give royal titles (i.e. Prince or Princess and Crown Prince and Crown Princess), as the preparatory work before the constitutional changes in 1990, the current reading of Article 34 has to be read with background in the previous reading.

DTH​

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

The easiest way (if possible under Norwegian constitution) would be for Märtha Louise herself to not ask for approval or for her to give up her rights to the throne upon/before marriage. What is the official process for asking for approval (is only the king involved; or also parliament - as some referenced the Storting?)

When it was the heir (i.e. Haakon), he talked with the King before his engagement, then the King informed the Prime Minister and the Storting that he would give his consent.

But in Märtha's case, they are treating it quite differently.
Because when the newspaper Aftenposten (after the engagement in June 2022) asked the court whether the Prime Minister had been consulted, they said the following:
''Som Hans Majestet Kongen har vært tydelig på tidligere så bestemmer ikke Kongeparet hvem prinsesse Märtha Louise skal gifte seg med. Det er prinsessens eget valg. Det er for øvrig ingen krav om at Kongen må ha samtale med statsministeren om dette.''
''As His Majesty the King has made clear in the past, the Regent-Couple doesn't decide whom Princess Märtha Louise marries. It's the princess' own choice. Furthermore, there is no requirement that the King must have a conversation with the Prime Minister about this.''
You must have an account to read the article (link).

And the Prime Minister's office confirmed to the tabloid VG that the King and the Prime Minister had not discussed Märtha's engagement and said that there is no requirement for them to do so.
They also said that the Prime Minister had congratulated Märtha and Durek on their engagement and wished them all the best.
You must have an account to read the article (link).

In the same article, you can also read that the President of the Storting, Masud Gharahkhani said that the Storting was not notified by the Palace about the engagement.
''Given her formal status, it is also not something we would expect'', he said.

So the court, the government and the Storting are all treating this as if it's not that important at all.

And I'm reading this as: Yes, the King will give his consent, but she is not going to be monarch, so it's not a big deal!

and is there a way to give up rights to the throne (preferably without her daughters losing their rights as well) except for entering into an unapproved marriage?

No, but Märtha can just ask the King not to give his consent and then make it publicly herself that it is her own wish. But then her daughters would lose their succession rights. But who knows, perhaps the government could come up with a solution so they can keep it.

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

If Princess Märtha Louise is no longer in the line of succession... Wil she be then a Princess still?

Well, article 34 in the constitution pre-1990 said the following: ''The nearest heir to the throne, if he is the son of the reigning King, shall bear the title of Crown Prince. The other persons entitled to succeed to the throne shall be called Princes, and the Royal daughters, Princesses.''
(BTW, the bolded stuff in my translation differs a bit from the one you can read in Tatiana Maria's post, which is written by the Norwegian historian Dag T. Hoelseth)

Article 34 after 1990, when women were allowed to succeed: ''The King shall make provisions concerning titles for those who are entitled to succeed to the Crown.''

This means that only those with succession rights can bear a royal title.
But it was decided back in 1990 that Princesses Ragnhild and Astrid (who were not in line to the throne) should be allowed to keep their titles since they had gotten them before the changes of article 34 took place.

Read more in this article from the Scandinavian University Press (link).

And who knows, perhaps Märtha, like Ragnhild and Astrid, would have been allowed to keep her title since she had gotten it before the changes of article 34 took place.

 

[valeas]

For members interested in Durek, here is further "news"
https://www.seher.no/kongelig/en-aere-a-ha-meg-i-familien/80787946

I saw Maihaugen , its a very modest house, actually a farmhouse the RF uses when being at Lillehammer. The museum surrounding the building is then closed of course but in the summertime every visitor can take a close look, sit in front of the house. I took a photo sitting in front, on the King's bench last summer

Well, we saw a naked British prince, what else could shock us. Norway was upset because Durek posed in front if the Royal emblem telling his weird stories.
Personally I fear the situation after the wedding a lot, once the King has died Martha will go totally loose and so is Durek, poor Hakon, but as the RF is so close to Durek and trust him, what do we know.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Filming himself in a bathroom with the King and Queen's joint monogram partly visible on the wall might be an accident, but it might remind the couple's critics of the times when Princess Märtha Louise's title appeared in business material after she had agreed not to use it commercially and her spokesperson said it was accidental.

(Incidentally, I'm a bit surprised that King Harald and Queen Sonja have their monogram on a bathroom wall.)

I do think his critics have a point that replying to criticism on his social media with comments such as "Did I mess it up. as according to my father inlaw and future brother in law. They say it's an honor to have me in the family. So that's your opinion not theirs." seem to be in contravention of the agreed rules announced on the royal website on November 8, 2022, when Princess Märtha Louise renounced her patronages:

"Accordingly, they will not indicate an association with the Royal House of Norway in their social media channels (with the exception of @PrincessMarthaLouise on Instagram), in media productions or in connection with other commercial activities. In practice this means that the Princess and Durek Verrett will avoid mention of this association in activities such as social media tagging, the use of the Princess title or the use of pictures of, or references to, other members of the Royal House in channels where commercial activity also takes place. This includes interviews primarily intended to draw attention to commercial activity."​

Incidentally, that statement and the one about the Princess renouncing her patronages have been scrubbed from the English version of the royal house's website, although they remain on the Norwegian version. Does anyone know the reason for that?

 

[Granada]

Thanks for posting valeas.

I watched the cringe video and saw the picture of him in the bathroom. WHY put out that picture, and of course the monogram ! An exhibitionist. He literally makes my skin crawl.

 

[Toledo]

Thanks for posting valeas.

I watched the cringe video and saw the picture of him in the bathroom. WHY put out that picture, and of course the monogram ! An exhibitionist. He literally makes my skin crawl.

Exactly. We are all watching a train wreck in slow motion leading to a wedding. When he becomes the boss of her, mark my words, she'll react and take the blindfold off her eyes to see he married her status. Had she been only Martha without the of Norway on her name he will still be in California pitching fake remedies and advice to gullible celebrities.

As I pointed out in the past, he is just one of thousands of California residents that have become a predatory culture with the goal to access celebrities. A bit of a nation of celebrity stalkers passing as health gurus and life coaches.

Martha, like Whoopee Goldberg said to Demi Moore in the movie Ghost, you're in danger, girl.

 

[Sister Morphine]

I honestly thought these two had split up. I didn't know they were still together. Maybe that was wishful thinking on my part. I know they say love is blind, but girl. Open your eyes. I'd love to sit her down and ask her two questions; "What do you see in him?" and "Is he worth destroying your reputation and your relationship with your family?

 

[hereditarytitles]

Exactly. We are all watching a train wreck in slow motion leading to a wedding. When he becomes the boss of her, mark my words, she'll react and take the blindfold off her eyes to see he married her status. Had she been only Martha without the of Norway on her name he will still be in California pitching fake remedies and advice to gullible celebrities.

I'm afraid that once they are married nothing will change. He is already the BOSS in their relationship, if that wasn't the case Märtha would have protested long ago. But she has said nothing, in fact supporting him whenever they had an interview. She is hopeless when it comes to her love and admiration for the Shaman. There might be lots of reasons we don't know, which are probably very private. She is a divorced lonely woman, has no specific task or profession in her life, 50 years old. And then she found this guy and fell in love with him, plus with her own ideas of being special, following all the esocteric stuff, being able to "talk to angles", he is the ideal partner for her. And she doesn'care at all for her family, her old parents, for the status of the Norwegian Royals. I never heard a statement such as " I know how difficult it is for my family and for the people in Norway to accept this guy". NO, it is always the opposite. The people, the press... they are all racist and prejudiced etc.
It is a tragedy and will be in the future, I am afraid.
The only thing which I still do not understand is why they are insisting to marry in Norway and stay in Norway.
I remember that Durek whenever he tried Norway wasn' happy there. The cold climate, the people, him being not accepted. Why don't they move to California where he still might earn his own money with "healing"?
There must be a reason for that.
And on a sidenote: He claimed months ago that he wouldn't be able to marry as long as he doesn't have a new kidney. What happened to that in the meantime? People with kidney failure are very very ill people who cannot function any longer without going on the machine 3 times a week. And the rest of the week they are not feeling good. No way somebody that ill is sitting on his PC and permantly sending such messages and pics as he does or has been doing.
Just my thoughts...

 

[Granada]

If anyone believes this grifter is in love with Martha Louise, including her Family, I'm the Easter Bunny. But they are seemingly stuck.
It just sickens me that the Shaman Conman keeps upping the provocations AND Martha Louise encourages him.

King Harold is a REAL favorite of mine. Why ? Don't know, He just seems so relatable and like Prince Philip, could and would talk to ANYONE from any walk of life. A real deal.

Maybe it was that he was separated from his Father and Grandfather in WWll when Norway was invaded. They went to London, NOT knowing how the War would turn out.

Harold, a little boy sent with his Mother and Sisters to The US. Lucky to get out. Or his perseverance in insisting on Sonja. OR NO-ONE.

I've never got that "relatable" vibe from contemporaries like Spain's Juan Carlos, Sweden's Carl Gustaf or even Denmark's Queen Margarethe. Fair or not, just my opinion. Not a criticism either. Just they seem more intimidating.

My personal hope is that lots of Royals boycott this Wedding. But probably in vain, as they would certainly be accused of Racism by these Two.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

When it was the heir (i.e. Haakon), he talked with the King before his engagement, then the King informed the Prime Minister and the Storting that he would give his consent.

But in Märtha's case, they are treating it quite differently.
[...]

(Unfortunately the forum will not allow me to quote the full post, but I encourage others to read it.)

How was the process handled when Princess Märtha Louise was engaged to marry Ari Behn? Even though constitutionally there is no difference between Crown Prince Haakon's and Princess Märtha Louise's marriages, it wouldn't necessarily indicate anything amiss for the spare's marriage to be handled with less government involvement than the heir's; however, the government being more involved with one of the spare's marriages than the spare's other marriage might say something about the different political circumstances surrounding her two marriages.

That said, I think it is already clear that the royal family and the government are treating her second marriage differently than her first marriage: The royal family by not issuing the engagement and wedding announcements (only congratulating the couple), the government by not providing taxpayer funds for her second wedding as the then government did for her first wedding.

 

[Granada]

Just as an aside, I think Matha Louise *might* have thought or hoped ( !!!) that her second Wedding might resembles Joachim in Denmark's 2nd marriage to Marie. All the Whistles and bells. Martha Louise attended as did Victoria of Sweden and brother Haakon and Mette Marrit.

After Martha Louise's engagement was announced, she was questioned when it would take place. She tellingly said, "It takes time to plan a Royal Wedding".
Unfortunately, I think it was made clear to ML and Durek, that this would be a much more low key event, than they had envisioned. From the perspective of Harold and Sonja and The Court, I believe.

Maybe that what rankles them. They wanted a Prince Joachim 2nd Marriage 'Gala'. Gowns and Tiaras for all. Instead they ARE perhaps getting the Princess Anne low key affair. I wouldn't be surprised anyway........