Charles and Diana

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

[I appreciate that you provided 4 different sources but the ultimate source was Diana herself--10 years after the fact. At that point she was in the middle of the breakdown of her marriage, when estranged spouses often "shade" the truth. Unfortunately for those who believe every word that came out of her mouth, contemporary news sources indicate that this particular story is false]//quote


US RoyalWatcher,

Who were these "contemporary news sources" who were/are so irrefutable? The master spin doctor from Clarence House known as Mark Bolland? Nicholas Soames or some other person from Charles and Camilla's circles after Diana was dead?

I am not sure how the fact that Diana did hunt with Charles a few times proves the story is false. Maybe she was making an effort to enjoy a sport she loathed for Charles's sake? She definitely did not hunt regularly with Charles.

By Camilla's own admission the pre-wedding lunch did indeed happen. It's just that Camilla's version of what they discussed differs from Diana's.


Finally, I am not quite sure how believing that the idea that Camilla had ulterior, selfish motives for vetting Diana equals"believing every word that comes out of Diana's mouth." As flawed as Diana's version of events turned out to be, the fact is that Camilla's hands are NOT clean in this mess. She might not have schemed on Diana's level but that does not make her behavior any less dishonorable, imo. She was betraying her husband and her marital vows long before Diana came on the scene, after all.

First of all, the sources were numerous contemporaneous newspaper articles. If you read the article, the palace confirmed that Diana went hunting on that day. It is also a fact that Diana's father was a hunter and that Diana had spent holidays with the royal family (before she started dating Charles) in which hunting was part of the agenda.

Second, Diana's version is ludicrous. Do you actually believe that Diana, knowing that Charles was looking for a wife who enjoyed country sports, admitted to one of Charles's oldest friends that she had no intention of going hunting? Did she also admit to hating fishing? That would have been admitting that she was play acting in order to trap Charles into marriage--perhaps she would have admitted that to a few friends but hardly to one of Charles's friends.

I doubt that she admitted it to anyone, including herself. I think she tried very hard to be the sort of woman Charles would want to marry. Unfortunately for both of them, it worked. It never works to pretend to be someone other than who you really are.

[Lee27]

I have always felt that both Charles and Diana were victims.
Charles was strongly influenced by his family to follow the path they mapped out for him which included marriage to a suitable member of British nobility.
Diana was looking for a knight in shinning armor.
I think Diana was more in love with the POW than Charles the man and
Charles was pushed along by the media's love of Diana.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Moonmaiden23]

First of all, the sources were numerous contemporaneous newspaper articles. If you read the article, the palace confirmed that Diana went hunting on that day. It is also a fact that Diana's father was a hunter and that Diana had spent holidays with the royal family (before she started dating Charles) in which hunting was part of the agenda]//quote US Royal Watcher

The context in which Camilla posed the question about hunting at the famous lunch was not whether or not Diana was going to hunt on a specific day. Camilla's query was a general one. She wanted to know whether Diana, after the wedding when she became Princess of Wales, was going to be regularly accompanying Charles when he hunted. Since this was an activity that she, Camilla, regularly shared with her lover, her reasons for wanting to know if Diana was going to be along seem pretty clear.

Even before the death of Diana this incident was reported in contemporary news sources including US Weekly and People Magazine. After the tragedy of the Paris car crash, I specifically remember reading it in none other than the Los Angeles Times.

If every story that originated with Diana needs to be considered spurious I don't understand why every denial that obviously originated with Camilla or her camp is automatically accepted as gospel.

For me at least, the story of the vetting lunch has the ring of truth to it. Diana did not hunt regularly before the wedding and she did NOT HUNT REGULARLY afterward either...just as she is reported to have assured Camilla she wouldn't.

For what reason would Camilla, a woman who had spent years in an adulterous relationship with the Prince of Wales, want to call his fiancée up for lunch in order to get to know her better? Diana is not the only young woman who would have become suspicious and even paranoid later.

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

The context in which Camilla posed the question about hunting at the famous lunch was not whether or not Diana was going to hunt on a specific day. Camilla's query was a general one. She wanted to know whether Diana, after the wedding when she became Princess of Wales, was going to be regularly accompanying Charles when he hunted. Since this was an activity that she, Camilla, regularly shared with her lover, her reasons for wanting to know if Diana was going to be along seem pretty clear.

Even before the death of Diana this incident was reported in contemporary news sources including US Weekly and People Magazine. After the tragedy of the Paris car crash, I specifically remember reading it in none other than the Los Angeles Times.

If every story that originated with Diana needs to be considered spurious I don't understand why every denial that obviously originated with Camilla or her camp is automatically accepted as gospel.

For me at least, the story of the vetting lunch has the ring of truth to it. Diana did not hunt regularly before the wedding and she did NOT HUNT REGULARLY afterward either...just as she is reported to have assured Camilla she wouldn't.

For what reason would Camilla, a woman who had spent years in an adulterous relationship with the Prince of Wales, want to call his fiancée up for lunch in order to get to know her better? Diana is not the only young woman who would have become suspicious and even paranoid later.

Perhaps Camilla did pose the question but I do not believe that Diana said she wasn't planning to hunt with Charles (and the story said that she wouldn't hunt with Charles--it said nothing about whether she would do it on occasion).

When I evaluate the truthfulness of a particular statement, I look at the full context within the situation. The story you cite makes no sense if you look at it from when it supposedly happened 1980. The numerous newspaper report from 1992 are based simply on Diana's word--more than 10 years after the fact and during the breakdown of the marriage.

I don't believe everything negative thing I read about Diana. Some things just don't ring true. We know that Charles asked Camilla and other friends to get to know Diana and try and explain what type of person he was to Diana. It was his way of trying to make sure that she knew what she was getting into.

Charles is not blameless in the breakdown of the marriage. He didn't understand Diana's emotional needs. He was wrong to have an affair and he was dishonest with Diana about having an affair. He's probably a bit fussy and set in his ways.

Diana was not blameless either. She was dishonest about her interests, she put too much pressure on Charles to be her "knight in shining armor," she didn't understand his emotional needs. She also had several affairs of her own and liked to have everything her own way.

She was also mentally ill, she admitted to depression and an eating disorder and didn't understand the impact that had on the people around her.

[Skippyboo]

There are also different types of hunting. There is foxhunting which Camilla and Charles regularly did and hunting with rifles which something done at Balmoral or at Sandringham. Diana didn't ride so she wasn't going chase the hounds but she could spend time in the country.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Dman]

Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher

Perhaps Camilla did pose the question but I do not believe that Diana said she wasn't planning to hunt with Charles (and the story said that she wouldn't hunt with Charles--it said nothing about whether she would do it on occasion).

When I evaluate the truthfulness of a particular statement, I look at the full context within the situation. The story you cite makes no sense if you look at it from when it supposedly happened 1980. The numerous newspaper report from 1992 are based simply on Diana's word--more than 10 years after the fact and during the breakdown of the marriage.

I don't believe everything negative thing I read about Diana. Some things just don't ring true. We know that Charles asked Camilla and other friends to get to know Diana and try and explain what type of person he was to Diana. It was his way of trying to make sure that she knew what she was getting into.

Charles is not blameless in the breakdown of the marriage. He didn't understand Diana's emotional needs. He was wrong to have an affair and he was dishonest with Diana about having an affair. He's probably a bit fussy and set in his ways.

Diana was not blameless either. She was dishonest about her interests, she put too much pressure on Charles to be her "knight in shining armor," she didn't understand his emotional needs. She also had several affairs of her own and liked to have everything her own way.

She was also mentally ill, she admitted to depression and an eating disorder and didn't understand the impact that had on the people around her.

Camilla knew what she was doing when she invited Diana to the lunch. Diana didn't know she was being set up.

[Mermaid1962]

Hunting with rifles in the UK is called "shooting." I'm not sure whether it's called "hunting" anywhere else but here in North America.

Originally Posted by Skippyboo

There are also different types of hunting. There is foxhunting which Camilla and Charles regularly did and hunting with rifles which something done at Balmoral or at Sandringham.

This is information I haven't seen before. Do you remember where it came from? I know that Diana claimed that Camilla was always telling her what to do or not what to do in dealing with Prince Charles, but I didn't know that it was something that he told his friends to do.

It goes to show the lack of closeness between two people who were getting married.

Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher

We know that Charles asked Camilla and other friends to get to know Diana and try and explain what type of person he was to Diana. It was his way of trying to make sure that she knew what she was getting into.

[Dman]

Originally Posted by Mermaid1962

This is information I haven't seen before. Do you remember where it came from? I know that Diana claimed that Camilla was always telling her what to do or not what to do in dealing with Prince Charles, but I didn't know that it was something that he told his friends to do.

It goes to show the lack of closeness between two people who were getting married.

I never heard that before either, if so, it proves how cold the set up.

[Skippyboo]

If hunting is only fox hunting in the UK, why would even Camilla ask Diana about it when she didn't like to ride horses?


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[wyevale]

why would even Camilla ask Diana about it

Because, I imagine, like everybody she expected the [soon to be Princess] to take it up.

[Mermaid1962]

Perhaps Camilla didn't know about Diana's dislike of horses. Maybe someone from the UK can clarify this. It's my understanding that "hunting" refers only to chasing foxes on horseback and what's done with a rifle is called "shooting." In North America, most sport which involves killing things is called hunting or fishing.

[MARG]

It seems to me that Elvis has left the building just as surely as this thread has jumped the rails and no longer requires "facts" and "credible references" to back up any of the allegations from either side of the "argument".

[Valerie Rose]

(I believe that the hunting with firearms, being mentioned above, involves shotguns rather than rifles by the way.)

[Mermaid1962]

Thank you, Valerie Rose. I don't know anything about guns.

Originally Posted by Valerie Rose

(I believe that the hunting with firearms, being mentioned above, involves shotguns rather than rifles by the way.)

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Skippyboo

There are also different types of hunting. There is foxhunting which Camilla and Charles regularly did and hunting with rifles which something done at Balmoral or at Sandringham. Diana didn't ride so she wasn't going chase the hounds but she could spend time in the country.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Precisely. That is the type of hunting Camilla and Charles engaged in and it was this type of hunting that Camilla reportedly grilled Diana about. And I 100% believe Diana did indeed answer NO . She had never ridden to hounds before, and in fact never did after her wedding because she hated blood sports.

Just because Diana exaggerated or outright lied about loving country life does not mean she lied about not hunting. Dressing in stylish hunt outfits and following the hunters in an ATV, which is what Diana did occasionally do after the wedding-is not the same thing as shooting and riding to hounds at all.

[JessRulz]

Just a reminder, this thread is about Charles and Diana - not Diana and Camilla. If you wish to continue discussing the 'lunch' between Diana and Camilla prior to the wedding and it's contents, do so via PM.

Further posts which discuss the CDC triangle will be removed by a moderator. Let us also remember that posts need to be factual, rather than speculative.

[Queen Camilla]

Interesting how Diana's supporters keep blaming everyone but Diana.

Diana was stubborn she would not have taken advise from anyone.

Diana was an adult when she married Charles. She was an adult when she readily accepted Prince Charles' marriage proposal. Charles told Diana to serious consider the implications in marrying him.

To compare the Queen parents to Diana's parents without comparing Diana to Diana's family seems to overlook Diana's family except when blame is dished out.

Diana's mother married at age 18 years 4 months to a man 12 years older.
Diana married at age 20 to a man 12 years 7 months older.
Diana's sister Jane married at age 21 to a man 15 years 3 months older.
Diana's grandmother Ruth married at age 22 years 11 months to a man 23 years 4 months older.

Diana and her family saw nothing wrong with a 20 year old marrying a man who was 32.

[royal rob]

Diana was a teenager marrying an older man who was the prince of Wales. But I'm sure you will something wrong in that so go for it


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Queen Camilla]

Diana was 20 when she married.

Diana dropped out of school at 16.

She was living on her own since she was 16 or 17.

Except for holidays, Diana had not lived under her parent's roof since the age of 7 - 9 depending on the source.

Diana had 3 or 4 years of 'life experience' from the time she left school until she married.

[Cris M]

At 20, people are allowed to vote, drive and drink in many countries. Being 20 at the time she married is no excuse for the mistakes Diana did.

I can't understand why some people want so badly to portray her as an innocent young girl fooled by an evil "older" man. She was fully aware of what she wanted and of what she was doing.