The Monarchy under Charles

[Nice Nofret]

How nice, then, that Prince Charles's own poor grades did not get in the way of him getting into Cambridge and that he was admitted nonetheless, because the institution had confidence that he could achieve at a level higher that what he had actually demonstrated.
.

You miss the Point - Cambridge isn't all about school grades. Cambridge does an assessment of the applicant's and a lot is decided by votes of professors who spoke with the students for quit some time.

 

[Tiberivs]

Unfortunately I feel that this is the very reason why so many people dislike him. There are many people who don't like those who are good at or know things, especially when it has nothing to do with sport, pop music or movie stars.
Charles has spent so much of his time actually achieving things, not bad for someone who doesnt actually have to do anything.

But he isn't "good at or know things", not really. While he preach for the "environment" he doesn't have a problem living a lifestyle that is very harmful to it. He feel that he could talk about a variety of issues in which he doesn't have any qualification in, some of his view are just outright bizarre and ridicules (such as his objection to conventional medicine).

He owe everything to his name, do you seriously think that if he wasn't the PoW anybody would take his seriously? I think not.

 

[HRHHermione]

His objections to conventional medicine are actually pretty interesting if you take any time to read what he's talking about. Many people have raised similar points.

You don't have to agree with all of his beliefs, but exploring them would be worth your time.

 

[Iluvbertie]

But he isn't "good at or know things", not really. While he preach for the "environment" he doesn't have a problem living a lifestyle that is very harmful to it. He feel that he could talk about a variety of issues in which he doesn't have any qualification in, some of his view are just outright bizarre and ridicules (such as his objection to conventional medicine).

He owe everything to his name, do you seriously think that if he wasn't the PoW anybody would take his seriously? I think not.

However the fact that people do listen to him and that he has made a difference in 1000s of young people lives is because he is the PoW and has made a point of doing things with his life.

Have you ever watched any documentaries on Highgrove - he does run that very much according to his beliefs about the environment. He is very conscious of his carbon footprint and pays into a negative carbon footprint fund that buys trees etc to offset the carbon footprint he creates. He actually does live what he preaches and he is listened to because he talks a lot of sense and has done so for years before it became fashionable.

He doesn't reject conventional medicine but believes in complementary medicine as well - a situation of using natural remedies whereever possible rather than chemical ones. Natural medicines can be very effective and are increasingly popular as people want to give up on the chemicals and their side effects.

No one has to listen to Charles but as they do it also shows that what he says makes sense to many of them.

Qualifications are not all about formal studies - if so most of use couldn't talk on most issues - but can comne about through studying and researching things of interest - many people who do that are just as qualified in a sense of having the knowledge without having the piece of paper that says you are qualified. e.g. I have no formal qualifications about the world of cricket but am very knowledgeable and many people will ask me about it because they know I have an interest, have researched and studied that subject (even my brother, a professional sports commentator, acknowledges that on that topic my knowledge is greater than his - yet he calls the game at times for a living).

 

[HRHHermione]

Great post, iluvbertie.

Charles has been very shabbily treated by the media throughout his life, and I think very misunderstood as well.

He's done some great things with his life though- he'll make a wonderful king.

 

[Tyger]

But it is not a jest and you never intended that it should be. To imply that it is merely shows a lack of belief in your own integrity.

I feel compelled to say this: we are in a textual communication. We don't have in-person cues to know when someone is making an OTT joke. That's why we have smilies. Its like sign language. Saying something is a joke is necessary sometimes because the poster understands the ambiguity - nothing to do with integrity issues, more rather has to do with precision.

Yes indeed, you really do not like this man at all and will not allow that he has achieved anything further than being born. However, if that is the premise on which you base any arguments against Prince Charles achievements, why bother to pretend that rude, vulgar and misleading statements made by you about him are merely a jest?

I understand your upset because Charles has to deal with such negativity that is really uncalled for but you may be misunderstanding the poster - but I'll leave it.

I've become an advocate of Charles. I really have come to like the guy and have enormous respect for him and the difficulties he has had to face - and still does. Example: here he is the Prince of Wales, the next King, and yet BBC News tonight showed footage of William and Kate visiting a riot area and not Charles and Camilla - what? William is so pompous and full of himself - sorry, that's what I see, he's not easy to watch - and Kate is a deer in headlights, very self conscious (I'm actually worried about her - but all the adulation drowns out any alertness to the fact that she is not comfortable - what I see is that she is having a tough time with the reality of her new life - that's what I see). Anyway, I am not interested in seeing the empty presentation of William and Kate (sorry - there is just no gravitas there yet) - I want to see Charles and Camilla, tons more interesting, and yet he is not put on the news. The atmosphere Charles has to live his life in and conduct himself within, I don't envy him - but he has learned to press on - impressive.

But he isn't "good at or know things", not really. While he preach for the "environment" he doesn't have a problem living a lifestyle that is very harmful to it. He feel that he could talk about a variety of issues in which he doesn't have any qualification in, some of his view are just outright bizarre and ridicules (such as his objection to conventional medicine).

He owe everything to his name, do you seriously think that if he wasn't the PoW anybody would take his seriously? I think not.

Actually his knowledge is quite deep and comprehensive in several areas - and its only an individual's ignorance of the larger picture that makes them believe that he does not have the facts. He does - and is indicating an important distinction. Mainstream medicine has two - or three - healing modalities: drugs, surgery and chemotherapy. Its caught in its mechanistic view of the human body (the human body as a machine). There was a conflict that took place at the beginning of the 20th century that tipped medicine down the path it has gone - and as with most things in our modern world - the determining factors were economic - not validity. The drug therapy 'modern medicine' advocates has less to do with healing than a profit motive. In the US it's a scandal the way drug companies 'buy' physicians to prescribe their drugs. The drugs being prescribed destroy people's vitality and in the right 'cocktail' combinations even kill - and its all legal. Charles is daring to speak up to that economic juggernaut. Bizarre? Ridiculous? That's what the drug companies want you to believe for sure. Not take Charles seriously? You should. He is truly a unique thinker and very relevant to the future.

 

[Super Baroness]

Tyger, I respect your opinion (you have great posts) but can I just say that I don't really understand the need to consistently compare William and Kate to Charles? It's not just you, I have seen several people go all "poor Charles" and then lament about the coverage of his son and daughter-in-law. Well, this thread isn't even about any of the royals current events but whatever. Perhaps the BBC didn't show Charles and Camilla today because their engagement was two days ago (?) We can agree that you like Charles, and I like Charles, but some people do not. There is a reason that generally, the Prince of Wales does not garner the respect he deserves and has to face "difficulties" - and I think we all know what it is...no need to rehash it. Yes, I admire his royal career, but in my opinion, his own choices cost him the respect and I feel it's a bit silly to admire him for putting up with things that he brought upon himself in the first place. While I look forward to his reign, I still feel that his image will be forever tainted by the past.

 

[Osipi]

But he isn't "good at or know things", not really. While he preach for the "environment" he doesn't have a problem living a lifestyle that is very harmful to it. He feel that he could talk about a variety of issues in which he doesn't have any qualification in, some of his view are just outright bizarre and ridicules (such as his objection to conventional medicine).

He owe everything to his name, do you seriously think that if he wasn't the PoW anybody would take his seriously? I think not.

This is one reason his "Harmony" book is the next one I'll be reading. Actually my perceptions of some of his views are very much alike as far as I what I know now and I want to learn more of what he's talking about and believes. I have absolutely no qualifications either but I have learned how to go the "natural" way works. Did you know that taking a capsule of white willow bark and feverfew daily help offset the onset of migraines and avoiding cheese, wine, and certain other foods helps prevent the onset of a migraine? And.. when moving to a totally different climate, the way to acclimate is to eat and absorb bodiiy the natural products of the area? It worked for me when I moved from a colder climate to a sub tropical. I'd always been allergic to orange juice. By using honey made from the area I was in, over the years now, even though I've moved, I not only drink orange juice but I crave it sometimes.

I really don't think a lot of what Charles does has the stamp PoW on it, its mostly Charles and what he cares about. Being PoW does give it more of a outreach though. Perhaps its the lifestyle he does have that has afforded him to be passionate about the things he does? I've told a few friends moving the things I know and how to adjust. Being PoW, he has the means to reach all of us. To me that counts for something.

He's come a very long way in my estimation of him and I'll let you know after I read Harmony if it grows.

And as a added note: its not unusual for a father to be introverted and a son extroverted either. I see a lot of Charles in both William and Harry and Charles is a lot like his mother.

 

[Osipi]

How about we think about what changes or non changes that will actually maybe perhaps happens when Charles the Green does ascend the throne?

Does anyone think that perhaps Canada's move is to put in place the "royal" back into their armed services a salute to HM or to support the upcoming monarchy of Charles?

What moves will Charles make to define the royal family and their duties and limitations.

I was thinking we should get back to the Monarchy under Charles and not about Charles himself.

 

[Tyger]

Tyger, I respect your opinion (you have great posts) but can I just say that I don't really understand the need to consistently compare William and Kate to Charles? It's not just you, I have seen several people go all "poor Charles" and then lament about the coverage of his son and daughter-in-law. Well, this thread isn't even about any of the royals current events but whatever. Perhaps the BBC didn't show Charles and Camilla today because their engagement was two days ago (?) We can agree that you like Charles, and I like Charles, but some people do not. There is a reason that generally, the Prince of Wales does not garner the respect he deserves and has to face "difficulties" - and I think we all know what it is...no need to rehash it. Yes, I admire his royal career, but in my opinion, his own choices cost him the respect and I feel it's a bit silly to admire him for putting up with things that he brought upon himself in the first place. While I look forward to his reign, I still feel that his image will be forever tainted by the past.

Have I 'consistently' compared Charles and William? Not aware of that particularly. I do know that I think Charles is far and away the better choice to be King than William at this stage of William's life and have spoken to that on the appropriate threads.

I do think I have begun to harbor an actual dislike of William - stemming from his decision to pop down here to LA and 'progress' through the poverty areas of LA - good lord! The arrogance! When I saw that - I realized I was looking at a young man who fancies things about himself - probably to do with his mother. He annoys me as a result. That someone as lacking in imagination is subject to adulation when his father - who started the Prince's Trust when he was younger than William is now - is relegated to minimalization - is urking. Charles did nothing but do his duty. He brought nothing upon himself. Except that he made a very bad choice of first wife. Charles handled a tragic situation as best as could be expected - his image should not be tainted because of what his first wife decided to say about him - but its what he has to put up with. Not his doing - but he handles himself well in spite of the beliefs people have about him.

What is clear to me is - he has lived a life of accomplishment - and being King will be his right - but he could not be King and still have a significant entry in the history of our time. He has made choices to serve in the world he knows in a way that makes his contribution substantively different from Anne, Andrew and Edward. He's very interesting.

 

[Tyger]

I think that Prince Charles' comments on the riots were among the most insightful and compassionate of any public figure.

Do you think it indicates the nature of the monarchy when he will be King?

 

[Madame Royale]

probably to do with his mother

Relevance? Severely lacking it would seem...

That someone as lacking in imagination is subject to adulation when his father - who started the Prince's Trust when he was younger than William is now - is relegated to minimalization - is urking

So you'll in turn rationalise your growing dislike of William because his father has faced some harsh criticisms over the years, despite Charles' good works, and he has not? If so, that's some well misplaced hang up you appear to harbour.

 

[fascinator]

You miss the Point - Cambridge isn't all about school grades. Cambridge does an assessment of the applicant's and a lot is decided by votes of professors who spoke with the students for quit some time.

Do you mean that they focus on the student and assess her potential rather than limiting the decision to the student's grades so that the child is at the center of the Admissions inquiry?

Then Charles benefitted from child centered education that considered the whole person and valued his potential over his accomplishments to date.

Why, then, does he criticize child centered education and people aspiring beyond their demonstrated ability?

This is like Clarence Thomas rallying against affirmative action from the Supreme Court bench that he occupies as a result of affirmative action.

 

[Osipi]

I do think I have begun to harbor an actual dislike of William - stemming from his decision to pop down here to LA and 'progress' through the poverty areas of LA - good lord! The arrogance! When I saw that - I realized I was looking at a young man who fancies things about himself - probably to do with his mother. He annoys me as a result. That someone as lacking in imagination is subject to adulation when his father - who started the Prince's Trust when he was younger than William is now - is relegated to minimalization - is urking.

I saw it completely different. And it does reflect on the future of the monarchy in the future. William is NOT the first son to do something like visiting the slum areas of LA. Harry popped over the pond to participate in a polo thing for Sentable Sentebale Home Page and guess what! He went to Harlem. He was in the neighborhood. BBC NEWS | UK | Harry goes to Harlem on US visit. Polo and BAFTA seem good reasons for royals right? Slumming isn't eh?

Arrogance is one thing I think in the future that will be totally something one never sees in a British royal. This made me realize something (and yes I got my nails dirty looking for it) and I find it interesting. Elizabeth II's motto on her coat of arms is "God and My Right" Charles is "Ich Dien" translated from German as "I Serve". Fleur-de-lis Designs - Royal Coats of Arms; Queen Elizabeth, Prince Charles, Prince William.

Perhaps I'm off base here but I'm tending to see that the future royal family after HM is going to be one that serves and puts an effort into changing what they can to make life better for all of us. Arrogance? There's no comparison with William whether he is like his mother or like his dad. He's the best of the both of them and I clearly see it. Then again too.. an arrogant man wouldn't give the time of day to the poor Joe up on the mountain with a heart attack and just shrug and say "its not me". But that's what William does for a a living these days. Such arrogance of him!

There are reasons for doing the things they do that perhaps we don't know. Visiting Harlem and what they do as far as programs can fuel ideas for Senteble. The same with William and the areas in LA. We don't know the WHY he really went there do we?

This is all building into a future monarchy.. a reign that William KNOWS he has to take.

Charles would rather be a farmer... William might want to be search and rescue for years and Harry always did want to be a soldier.

What I'm seeing is that they do take what they can do and make a difference.. step by step. Wish we all could do that.

 

[MARG]

I feel compelled to say this: we are in a textual communication. We don't have in-person cues to know when someone is making an OTT joke. That's why we have smilies. Its like sign language. Saying something is a joke is necessary sometimes because the poster understands the ambiguity - nothing to do with integrity issues, more rather has to do with precision.

Whatever else this is, it is not textual! This is the English language, generally speaking, with grammar and (hopefully) correct spelling.

Smilies are not an "I can be as rude and offensive as I want, but as long as I tack on the odd 'Smilie' they're so thick they'll think it's an OTT joke", get out of jail free, pass.

If someone really hates Charles be up front. Not many will like it but at least it's honest. Smilies with a knife in the back are neither intellligent nor smart and ruin any serious debate.

 

[Osipi]

We also have to remember too that there are many among us that English is a second language or perhaps even translated. Saying "ise was eddicated" may get the point across to some and seem a joke but for some it is gibberish and have no meaning as it cannot be translated. Emos are a tool to accentuate but not to be considered as textual in a message. Its made me think twice how I "say" things. In my wording and my spelling. is it doughnut or donut? :0)

 

[fascinator]

Child centred education actually means a lot more than helping kids achieve their potential. *It also means not telling them their limitations e.g. allowing them to fail.

These days giving kids marks is frowned upon - because it might upset him. *That is child centred education - very different from the ideas of the 60s that Charles experienced.

Then you have to have the marks and yes 2 A levels was a borderline entrance mark to Cambridge but they did also interview entrants to ensure that they would fit in with the culture of the system and were also doing the right courses for them - a different concept altogether to the modern ideas of telling people that they can do anything they like despite the fact that they actually don't have the abilties - that is what child centred education is all about - and one of the consequences was the rioting last week of disconnected people who had been told all their youth that they could do anything and then when they got into the real world found that they couldn't so they hit back at the society.

Quite the opposite. *They have not had access and they have been told that their options are limited. *

Do you really believe that the problem is that these youths were given too much encouragement and made to have too much hope for their future prospects and that the British school system hadn't sufficiently stripped them of any overblown faith in their own potential?

I am mindful that you have consistently assumed a low intelligence and limited abilities amongst all of the riot participants, who are, as a group, economically underprivileged inner city youths, of mixed racial backgrounds. *(please don't take offense, this is my observation only.)

Obviously, one can project onto another person any number of experiences, but it is useful to listen to the actual voices of the people that are assuming to know so much about. *Did you have a chance to see the video from before the riots that I posted from Guardian UK? *Did you see the young man saying that he can't go out of his neighborhood because people look at him and seem afraid of him, and how, without the youth programs, he has no where to go, but to stand on the street corner while people eye him warily? Is this one of the over encouraged children you referring to, to whom too much has been given?

Rather than making such indefensible and reckless statements, why not listen to what Prince Charles himself has said on the matter? *Rather than digging his heels in over his previous statements that you are somewhat absurdly defending, he has EVOLVED in his thinking. *This is what some refer to as wisdom, when one learns from experiences and gains insight and compassion. *You are defending a line of thought that PC has apparently abandoned:

Prince Charles while visiting Tottenham after the riots:

"Half the problem is that people join gangs because it’s a cry for help and they’re looking for a sense of belonging"

Schools don't have enough extra-curricular activities now. There are not enough organised games or other kinds of activities. Young people need self-confidence. We have to motivate and encourage them and give them responsibility."
Earlier in the day he had also set out a policy idea, attempting to sketch out a way forward. ";We should have national community service to give all sorts of opportunities,"he said." All we have been doing is dealing with the symptoms, not giving the opportunities."

 

[fascinator]

I do think I have begun to harbor an actual dislike of William - stemming from his decision to pop down here to LA and 'progress' through the poverty areas of LA - good lord! The arrogance! When I saw that - I realized I was looking at a young man who fancies things about himself - probably to do with his mother. He annoys me as a result.

I was very touched by their visit to Skid Row. Why is that arrogant? So much better than pretending other people don't exist. I can't even see what there is to complain about. I'm sure the kids appreciated the visit. It even broadened my own view of the United States to see so many Latino children. I would have thought they were in Mexico, but i live in the northeast. Michelle Obama does something similar, though far more in depth, when she goes to London and while she engages the students on a much deeper level because they are older, it's a wonderful experience for the children.

That said, I have heard of celebrity school visits that are obnoxious where a celebrity gives a boastful "up by my bootstraps" pep talk to impoverished kids, but this was not the case here, as far as I am aware.

What was it that offended you?

 

[Osipi]

These conversations to me really represents a lot of what is crucial to the people that live in the city areas of the UK and its the same no matter what city we talk of worldwide.

Talking about influences, there are many besides the environment which any of us could be stuck in. There are children in the lowest income areas that could be blessed with genius IQ that never gets realized. There are children in lowest income areas that are a tad on the hefty side and see being thin is a way out. There are children everywhere that look up to their parents for examples. There are children raised by parents who think the bank account is the measure of their worth. And children that have just been plain forgotten.

Its not fixed by a royal visit, its not fixed by laws and it'll never be fixed by anything but education.

I'm not saying that Charles would be an educator or even very good at it but I think he's trying in his own way to "educate" people of a way of life that makes a community sustainable. Bring back the community sense of pride.

I've often thought about this before I even hit TRF. Its a what if. 100 years ago (my time) if I moved somewhere and needed a barn for my horse, if I was lucky, the community would have helped raise a barn and we'd have a party. The barn was the central focus on surviving life. Today with the global community, we really don't need anyone else... we contract what we need done. Watching a show on the Science channel, it was stated that one reason so many Chinese people wear headphones and listen to music in public is because people are so densely packed, it gives a sense of space. We're alone in a global community.

This is not a great thing for a future king to look forward to but its one I think Charles understands well.

I still think he should be called Charles the Green.

 

[Osipi]

Prince Charles while visiting Tottenham after the riots:

"Half the problem is that people join gangs because it’s a cry for help and they’re looking for a sense of belonging"

Schools don't have enough extra-curricular activities now. There are not enough organised games or other kinds of activities. Young people need self-confidence. We have to motivate and encourage them and give them responsibility."
Earlier in the day he had also set out a policy idea, attempting to sketch out a way forward. ";We should have national community service to give all sorts of opportunities,"he said." All we have been doing is dealing with the symptoms, not giving the opportunities."

Reminds me of the old adage "give a man a fish and he'll eat. Give a man a fishing pole and he'll feed himself". Or something along those lines.

From what I understand of Charles' sustainable community ideas, its the fishing pole and not the fish.
I may be way out of my league stating this but this is one thing that has stuck in my mind about Charles. With his Prince's Trust, he's trying to build communities that work together for a common purpose that they themselves can be proud of.

Being given everything that you need and want no matter where you are or how you were raised will never equal the feeling of earning something by merit. That is self esteem which I think Charles is trying in his own way to establish.

 

[Osipi]

I went back over my previous post as I usually do and noticed something. My last statement wasn't very clear.

"Being given everything that you need and want no matter where you are or how you were raised will never equal the feeling of earning something by merit. That is self esteem which I think Charles is trying in his own way to establish."

It could be read that I meant Charles is establishing his own self esteem or that the communities that he is working for are working for that same goal.

I think maybe it could be working both ways. One thing for sure is that for better or worse, Charles is trying to make a difference.

 

[fearghas]

I
I think maybe it could be working both ways. One thing for sure is that for better or worse, Charles is trying to make a difference.

And I think that that is the crux of the matter. Whether he is starting from a position of privalage, using his position in political ways, whether you agree with what he is striving for or not, Prince Charles is trying to make a difference when there is no obligation for him to do so. And that is why I think he is a leader and will make a great King. He is not just sitting around waiting for the crown to fall into his lap.

 

[Osipi]

And I think that that is the crux of the matter. Whether he is starting from a position of privalage, using his position in political ways, whether you agree with what he is striving for or not, Prince Charles is trying to make a difference when there is no obligation for him to do so. And that is why I think he is a leader and will make a great King. He is not just sitting around waiting for the crown to fall into his lap.

Just out of curiosity, really when was the last time that a King or PoW actually did anything like Charles is doing?

All I know that whatever bad connotations have been applied to Henry Viii, he did buld an awesome navy,

 

[Mirabel]

Great post, iluvbertie.

Charles has been very shabbily treated by the media throughout his life, and I think very misunderstood as well.

He's done some great things with his life though- he'll make a wonderful king.

I agree.

 

[Tyger]

Relevance? Severely lacking it would seem...

So you'll in turn rationalise your growing dislike of William because his father has faced some harsh criticisms over the years, despite Charles' good works, and he has not? If so, that's some well misplaced hang up you appear to harbour.

Some truth here but not for why you think - I am reacting, I think, to people's fans more than to them. After all, I really don't know William - but I do have occasion to experience his fans, and all this talk of leap-frogging over his father to the throne, etc. Its the animosity I see expressed by fans of Diana and now by fans of William, at what seems to be the expense of Charles - that I react to - and that said: am I becoming that which I abhor? It happens - we turn into that which we judge. Ah so!

BTW, it would seem I am besotted for Charles - I'm not, actually, but he is so regularly trounced that I feel there is need of a balance. The cruelty that his ex-wife set in motion towards him seems to have no let-up and that I find disturbing. The man is far, far more than the cartoon that is bandied about with such derision - he seems an example of the saying, how does it go? The prophet without respect in his own country? Something like that....

As for William's (and Harry's) coming over to foreign countries and 'looking around' - fine - just don't have 'my' city's police department have to deal with 'you', and have 'me' (taxpayer) pay for what is in effect 'your' PR. Sorry, I am extremely jaded with these things - and I remain annoyed by what William decided to do in what is for him a foreign country. I believe he did it because he believes some of his mother's PR spin and is proceeding under that illusion, which I think is sad.

Now Charles, given he is the actual heir who 'stands in' for HM, and given his life's work - his visiting the down-and-out portions of Washington D.C. as he did some years back with Camilla - when I lived there - was wholly acceptable IMO. Nothing false about it. His interest was believable and his questions and comments bona fide.

 

[Osipi]

BTW, it would seem I am besotted for Charles - I'm not, actually, but he is so regularly trounced that I feel there is need of a balance. The cruelty that his ex-wife set in motion towards him seems to have no let-up and that I find disturbing. The man is far, far more than the cartoon that is bandied about with such derision - he seems an example of the saying, how does it go? The prophet without respect in his own country? Something like that....

Now here I do need to speak a truth. I *was* besotted by Charles growing up. He was the Action Man and I was just another hippie in the crowd.

Like most of us from that era, we marched to the tune of our own drums. It wasn't until I joined TRF that I knew he loved books and music as much as I do. I remember all the cartoons about the Dumbo ears and googly eyes and he was always pictured as being an awkward gangly guy. Not attractive..but then.. neither was I. And so I married another prince. Was a good idea at the time. Didn't work out after 20 some years so I moved on. So did Charles. Mine wasn't public so much as his was though. We as people moved on but Charles has something I don't. He's got press and people that will still remind him that he had a relationship that went south and froze. I had other things

I've not had Charles' riches that Ive dreamed would solve everything and to be honest, after everything in our lives... Charles and mine, we're still the same people but older and wiser. We're doing what we can in our own ways to make a difference.

I'll never be his Queen nor ride off in the sunset on a white horse with a real prince but I know in a way, I've made my difference in the world in my own way and to be honest.... so has Charles.

This might sound weird but its true. "When a man dies, he holds in his hands only that which he has given away"

Sad thing is.. if Charles died next week.. watch all the good things said about him.

anyone up for a Harmony book read discussion?

 

[Tyger]

anyone up for a Harmony book read discussion?

You know, I would be. Yes. I am curious. I saw the documentary. Give a link to the thread when you start it up.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Good gawd, Tyger your hatred for William is because he "dared" to go to a poverty stricken area of the US and have a look? Who the heck cares! Dozens of politicians do so, hundreds of celebrities do so; if we are lucky their tour will cause attention to the stricken area and perhaps encourage people to help out more. And as for the police, if Charles had done the same thing the police would have been called in to help; William and Kate are targets and the police are there to help prevent an assassination. It honestly seems you are just looking for a reason to hate William, if his interest in the less fortunate is at the top of your list. Or the fact that the BBC focuses on him more than his father and yet you blame that on William, like he is in contact with the station and is working against his dad.

This really needs to stop being a bash William/defend William thread.
Back to Charles, I don't know what else can be said about him; he is educated, politically active, and seems to care and respect his role greatly. I honestly don't know what kind of King he will be, but he appears to be one of the best Prince of Wales' since the Hanover's came over.

 

[Warren]

C'mon guys, this thread is not about William and certainly not about his receiving police (and Secret Service) protection while visiting certain areas of the US. William is a VIP, he receives British and host-city and host-country protection wherever he goes. That's the way it is.
Any further discussion of this topic should be in the Royal Security thread.

Let's move on now please.

thanks,
Warren
British Forums moderator

 

[HRHHermione]

I think bringing awareness and publicity to causes is one of the things the royal family does very well and I think Charles will continue to make that a priority when he's king.