Mabel Criticizes President Bush on AIDS: December 2005 - Page 3

Lady Marmalade · #41 12-01-2005, 11:03 PM

Hm..there is an Italian term that one would use to describe her...still an embarassement to Her Majesty the Queen....you go mr. p!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mandrake · #42 12-02-2005, 05:51 AM

I think you should all realize that however she's married to a prince, Mabel still is an independant woman working for an international organisation.
It would be strange if she would only act as 'royal', while her fulltime job is with the soros foundation.

Thank god she's an outspoken person, all those dull princesses who can do nothing more than just waving around are depressing me!!

Go for it Mabel!

Maxie · #43 12-02-2005, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mandrake

I think you should all realize that however she's married to a prince, Mabel still is an independant woman working for an international organisation.
It would be strange if she would only act as 'royal', while her fulltime job is with the soros foundation.

Well, that's just the whole problem with Mabel. She worked for Soros even before her wedding with prince Friso. Now I can imagine that there are people here who are saying: well, somebody who is part of the DRF shouldn't be involved in organisations like that, there is too much politics involved. But Mabel and Friso decided that they wouldn't be a part of the Dutch Royal House anymore, so legally they can do and say what they want and work for those organisations they please. Is this a good thing? Well, honestly I don't know. I think that if Beatrix had had any problems with it, she would have forbidden it already. The Queen is not the kind of woman who doesn't control matters like this. But that's still guessing, of course... what happens behind the closed doors of the palace, we'll never know... :o

By the way, I'm browsing some Dutch news sites and the thing some of them are talking about is that a third of the Dutch people is going to gain weight during the christmas period, so that is what is keeping the Dutch distracted. :p It's only in the Volkskrant (well, I haven't surfed all the newspapers, because I have to run within a few minutes) where we can find a little article about it, just mentioning that Mabel gave the speech and that she critized some countries. No name calling there...

I guess the Dutch are all like: 'Oh Mabel again...sigh', because I really really never met someone who actually really liked Mabel (neither do I to be honest). I think that most people in Holland don't care what she does, even if she stood on her head before Paleis Noordeinde... (though we would have a good laugh then and something to talk about here, that's for sure). The most of us are all just sooooo Mabel-tired, you really don't want to know...

Little_star · #44 12-02-2005, 07:12 AM

Personally i don't have a problem with what Mabel said. As I understand it, her hsband is not in the line of succession (is that correct) so there is not the isue of becoming Queen.

Congratulations to Mabel for a well-informed and articulate speech.

Maxie · #45 12-02-2005, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little_star

Personally i don't have a problem with what Mabel said. As I understand it, her hsband is not in the line of succession (is that correct) so there is not the isue of becoming Queen.

Congratulations to Mabel for a well-informed and articulate speech.

Yes, that's correct. :)

Oppie · #46 12-02-2005, 10:36 AM

I have a question. When she is "working" what name does she use. If she referring to herself and introducing herself as Princess Mabel of Oranje-Nassau. Then it is a problem, because I think the average person is going to think that she is a Dutch princess repersenting the Dutch Royal Family or the Netherlands.

That could become a problem, if the American press finds out that a Dutch princess (they won't look into the events around her marriage) was attacking Bush, then it could become a real problem, (Think France)

I think (and I applaud her) for her statement, but if she is going to start attacking Bush she better make it VERY clear that she is not a part of the Dutch Royal House and does not speak for Dutch people and the Dutch parliament.

Maxie · #47 12-02-2005, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oppie

That could become a problem, if the American press finds out that a Dutch princess (they won't look into the events around her marriage) was attacking Bush, then it could become a real problem, (Think France)

I have to agree on that one. I don't know how she calls herself while speeching about these delicate matters...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oppie

I think (and I applaud her) for her statement, but if she is going to start attacking Bush she better make it VERY clear that she is not a part of the Dutch Royal House and does not speak for Dutch people and the Dutch parliament.

I think Mabel is enough of a diplomate to know at least that. But then again, with Mabel one never knows what is going to happen... :)

Emily · #48 12-02-2005, 10:57 AM

Actually, I was wondering the same thing that you addressed in your post, Maxie...that is I was wondering what the fall out in the Dutch press would be. If you are part of the "Royal Family" then to remain an effective institution I think you would have to remain publicly impartial because they do represent the whole nation. On the other hand, since Mabel is somewhat on the margins. My guess is that QB would rein her in somewhat if the fallout of her talk had negative repercussions for the royals.

Maxie · #49 12-02-2005, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily

My guess is that QB would rein her in somewhat if the fallout of her talk had negative repercussions for the royals.

Yes, I would guess (and hope) that too. Beatrix has always been known for controlling her family very well (though it didn't work out too well with the whole Margarita-business, I have to admit that...)

betina · #50 12-02-2005, 01:14 PM

i can just say that when the tsunami struck there was a report in the newspaper how much money every country had supplied with per citicent.
USA was very low on that rank if you compared it to many European countrys.
I can also say that Denmark have found a vaccine against AIDS. Fantastic for such a small country.

Maxie · #51 12-02-2005, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by betina

i can just say that when the tsunami struck there was a report in the newspaper how much money every country had supplied with per citicent.
USA was very low on that rank if you compared it to many European countrys.
I can also say that Denmark have found a vaccine against AIDS. Fantastic for such a small country.

Personally I think this thread isn't about which country is good and which is bad (come on people, that's hardly interesting). It's about whether Mabel is stupid or not by mingling in this kind of business and being a princess at the same time... :o

pollyemma · #52 12-02-2005, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxie

Yes, I would guess (and hope) that too. Beatrix has always been known for controlling her family very well (though it didn't work out too well with the whole Margarita-business, I have to admit that...)

indeed. i dont think that any reigning in will be necessary in this case. if Mabel were still in the royal house this speech might well lead to discussions in parliament.

and that of course is where the real fireworks and headlines would come from.

some newspapers (and some royalty forums

) are paying attention to it but more than a day has passed since the speech and i'm not seeing a mayor media explosion so I'm guessing we can safely say this has blown over without any fallout.

what utterances mabel may make in the future, only time will tell...

Layla1971 · #53 12-02-2005, 01:36 PM

Ok, the thread is about the speech being appropriate for a princess.

Yes it was appropriate, Mabel is a member of the Royal Family not the Royal House and they are two different things with different responsibilities.

Layla1971 · #54 12-02-2005, 02:57 PM

I really don't see what all the fuss is about! So she is a member of a RF, so what? If you want to class her in dipomatic terms with a president, then her speech is just like a president 'urging' through a harsh speech another nation to change.

Mabel is an intelligent woman, she wouldn't do or say anything against her country or her family's best interests.

If anything she has used her publicity to highlight a decent cause rather than self-interest like many in her position may have.

She is a princess, maybe not an elected politician but still in a position to highlight causes, the public can still complain and since they haven't it doesn't seem she's made any unwelcome waves.
How can the US hold this against the Dutch government? The Netherlands wouldn't hold a harsh or even intrue speech by a Republican Congressperson or Senator against the president.

HRHAmy · #55 12-02-2005, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pollyemma

here's an article from Today's Telegraaf.

http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/2...eert_Bush.html

I will very roughly translate:

At an Aids conference in Amsterdam yesterday Princess Mabel lashed out as President Bush's policies.

She feels the Bush administration's policies harm the fight against HIV/AIDs among drug users and stigmatizes prositutes. The Open Society Institute where she works (headed by George Soros) has filed a law suit against the US government.

She said the US has done all within its power to keep measures to promote clean needles for drug users out of UN documents. despite the fact that clean needles among drug users prevents the spread of HIV/AIDS. Drugs and HIV/AIDS are often related she says. in Russia 80 percent of drug users are HIV positive.

The Open Society law suit has to do with prostitutes. The Bush administration will only fund help organizations that take an explicit stance against prostitution.

"sex workers are the victims of stigma, violence and discrimination," and now " organizations that help these people with money from the US government are required to judge them." she said. Bush's policy led the Brazilian government to refuse a 40 million dollar subsidy this year.

The Open Society hopes that it's lawsuit will lead to courts striking down the antiprositution rule as unconstitutional.

-----

Ok, I really really DON'T want to start a discussion on Bush and AIDS as that is way too explosive, we'll never agree and besides it's off topic.

My question is: is it appropriate for Mabel to give a speech like this? she's not a member of the royal house. but she is a member of the royal family and closely associated with the dutch head of state.

could she give this speech if parliament had approved her marriage to Friso and she were a member of the royal house carrying out official duties?

I really dont know. tell me what you think.

I am torn on this one, I think that since she is not a member of the royal house she should be able to state her feelings on such issues if she strongly believes in them. But on the other hand she did marry Prince Friso and even though they lost their line in succession they are still part of the the royal family and anything they do will always be associated to the Dutch Royal House even if they aren't in line anymore. I don't know, to me Mabel is a little bit of a trouble maker since she lied about having connections with a mobster and now this. Is she a princess who needs to follow the rules? or is she a commoner that just happens to have a title stuck to her name? I guess it depends on what the people's opinion of her is. I guess she should say what she feels on topics that are important to her. I am torn.

betina · #56 12-02-2005, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxie

Personally I think this thread isn't about which country is good and which is bad (come on people, that's hardly interesting). It's about whether Mabel is stupid or not by mingling in this kind of business and being a princess at the same time... :o

I was just answering a post by lady Marmalade but it has been deleted now

GlitteringTiaras · #57 12-02-2005, 05:55 PM

To be diplomatic about Mabel's speech I believe everyone has a right to their own opinion and freedom to state what they believe is to be true.

Maxie · #58 12-02-2005, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by betina

I was just answering a post by lady Marmalade but it has been deleted now

Yes, I know. It was just a comment in general...

SpiffyBallerina · #59 12-02-2005, 06:24 PM

Like I said, once you enter the public sphere, you're fair game. ESPECIALLY political figures who make decisions that have a huge impact in the world. It IS our duty to talk about these things, even if it's in agreement (like you have with Bush) or disagreement. Public discourse should be encouraged and not discouraged with the simple black and white explanation that disagreement equals disloyalty.

What Princess Mabel said was true. We don't do enough and we are so wealthy and powerful that we can afford to do a lot more. How is this different from state dinners during which the monarchs gently chide political leaders about lack of democracy, human rights, etc?

Roxsteve · #60 12-02-2005, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpiffyBallerina

Like I said, once you enter the public sphere, you're fair game. ESPECIALLY political figures who make decisions that have a huge impact in the world. It IS our duty to talk about these things, even if it's in agreement (like you have with Bush) or disagreement. Public discourse should be encouraged and not discouraged with the simple black and white explanation that disagreement equals disloyalty.

What Princess Mabel said was true. We don't do enough and we are so wealthy and powerful that we can afford to do a lot more. How is this different from state dinners during which the monarchs gently chide political leaders about lack of democracy, human rights, etc?

While I disagree with your comments, I respect them and thank you for your response.