Prince Charles's Diaries and the Court Case: 2006-2007

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by ysbel

So can we assume that you milla_Ca, as a resident of Hannover, hold a low opinion of your own prince and princess, Ernst August and Caroline?

They are not the prince and princess of Hanover. Ernst August's family used to reign there, they no longer do it but kept the "of Hanover"-part as their family name. Thus, no one in Hanover or elsewere has a reason to acknowledge them at all.

[Henri M.]

Originally Posted by milla Ca

And when he met Princess Caroline in the seventies, some people think they are a perfect couple to marry, but Charles told later a friend, that the Princess thought he is boring and he thought the same about her...they had nothing to talk about, and nothing else in common...

You have not mentioned the impossibility of the Prince of Wales marrying Princess Caroline because of the Act of Settlement (the ban on marrying Catholics).

That is why also the link made between the Prince of Wales and Princess Marie-Astrid of Luxembourg was most unlikely. The devout Luxembourgian Princess (now the Archduchess Karl-Christian of Habsburg) was the least likely to give up her faith. That was a pity because I'm sure Charles and Marie-Astrid do match extremely well in character and she is a most stylish, gracious and regal lady. A perfect Princess of Wales.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Henri M.

A perfect Princess of Wales.

That position is already perfectly filled, by the Prince's darling wife, Camilla!!

[Elspeth]

We seem to be drifting off topic here.

[Henri M.]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

That position is already perfectly filled, by the Prince's darling wife, Camilla!!

Indeed. Like the Archduchess Karl-Christian of Habsburg, also the Duchess of Cornwall does match extremely well in character and she is a most stylish, gracious and regal lady. A perfect Princess of Wales.

[Skydragon]

Famous for something

A woman's brush with royalty has elevated her to celebrity status.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/...ectid=10417894

[Avalon]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Famous for something
A woman's brush with royalty has elevated her to celebrity status.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/...ectid=10417894

It has to be the funniest article I have read in a long time, thanks for it!

[milla Ca]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Famous for something

A woman's brush with royalty has elevated her to celebrity status.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/...ectid=10417894

Thank you Skydragon for posting!
Read this article and you know everything about Sarah Goodall and her awful book!

[milla Ca]

Prince Charles fails to get copies of diaries back

Prince Charles failed to obtain a court order on Monday for a newspaper to return copies of his diaries, following its publishing of one in which he described Chinese officials as ´appalling old waxworks.´

Prince Charles fails to get copies of diaries back | UK | Reuters

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by milla Ca

Prince Charles fails to get copies of diaries back

Prince Charles failed to obtain a court order on Monday for a newspaper to return copies of his diaries, following its publishing of one in which he described Chinese officials as ´appalling old waxworks.´

Prince Charles fails to get copies of diaries back | UK | Reuters

Am I to understand that the ditzy lady in the previous article stole them and sold them to "The Telegraph"? Did I read that right? Is this big news in Britain right now?

[milla Ca]

Originally Posted by HRH Kimetha

Am I to understand that the ditzy lady in the previous article stole them and sold them to "The Telegraph"? Did I read that right? Is this big news in Britain right now?

If you want to know more about that ´´lady´´ ´, you can read it in this thread.
She sold the diaries not to the ´Telegraph´ but to the ´ Daily Mail´.
But Charles won the case against the tabloid. A big victory for him to protect his privacy!
It is not a big news now, but it was some month ago.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by milla Ca

If you want to know more about that ´´lady´´ ´, you can read it in this thread.
She sold the diaries not to the ´Telegraph´ but to the ´ Daily Mail´.
But Charles won the case against the tabloid. A big victory for him to protect his privacy!
It is not a big news now, but it was some month ago.

Creature is the best description, she is certainly not a lady, using the loosest interpretation of the word! She stole the copies, they didn't just fall into her handbag or stick to the inside of her coat!

You are right milla Ca, it is not seen as big news at the moment, but they are apparently launching another appeal, if not to publish at the moment, some time in the future!

[AgnesK]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Famous for something

A woman's brush with royalty has elevated her to celebrity status.

Famous for something - 06 Jan 2007 - NZ Herald: World / International News

Brilliant, just brilliant Thank you very much for posting!

[Suonymona]

I once took a breath in England. I am positive that a member of the Royal Family was once in the same spot and breathed the same air.

I am deserving of celebrity!

[HRH Kimetha]

I read some of the pages of the released journals and find them not offensive at all. Of course, not a mention of my name appeared, but that isn't the point at all. What I got out of the journals was a man who was reflecting on the events and his personal feelings about it. It's unfortunate that the "Thought Police" and the civilian deputies are crazily after Charles. Perhaps a world revolution to stop so much of the what the Prince hinted at should take place to restore the world and free it from the shackles that is placed on the people by governments.

[love_cc]

His dairies are his daries. It is all right to be known by his close circle but I don't think it should be known by the public. These remarks are not very offensive but very sarcisitic in my views. The tabloits only want to embrass the prince rather than publish it for public interests.
It is not a very diplomatic thing for them to do so and they are luckier that the Prince does not hold real power in national affairs,which did not lead to serious dioplamatic problems between Britain and China.

Personally I hope that the Prince may revise his views about China's regimes after he visiting China and talked to the people there. He should not make his assertions based on others' views.There is a culture difference and he knows that.I agree that he had deep thoughts for Hong Kong's people for good but he does not use a more dioplomic way to express it which saddened me.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by love_cc

I agree that he had deep thoughts for Hong Kong's people for good but he does not use a more dioplomic way to express it which saddened me.

They were as you said, 'his personal thoughts', never meant to be read by anyone except his friends and I am sure we have all been guilty of sarcasm or 'less than diplomatic' comments in letters we write to friends or in our journals.

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by love_cc

His dairies are his daries. It is all right to be known by his close circle but I don't think it should be known by the public.

I totally agree with you on that. It is only alright to be known by his close circle, if he deems so. There are not to be 'rumoured" about with others by those he gave them to.

These remarks are not very offensive but very sarcisitic in my views.

They are his thoughts and opinions not meant for anyone else but the few who know the Prince and how he feels. Some may be sarcastic or may some may be perceived as such. In my opinion, Charles was writing of his deep feelings and his observations and what he feels inside of the political situation that he was witnessing. Unfortunately for the Prince, and the rest of the royal family, he and they aren't 'allowed' to comment about politics or keep it so much at a minimum to not to "offend or question" governments, groups, individuals etc. for the sake of the monarchy. I rather feel for the Prince. Yes, he does have the comforts and priviledges, but so much is actually missing from the individual--such as freedom of speech, freedom of press and freedom of association of who he can be seen with or talk to without the tabloids, individuals, governments, and yes or forums asking for the end to the monarchy because the Prince overstepped the bounds of remaining quiet and keeping his 'trap' shut. I rather feel for him and everyone else in the "upper" echelon of the royal family. I mean, you can't even express a favourite soccer or football team. Such a sad state of affairs that the monarchy has been brought down to a low quality of 'real' life. We can speak out, but they must remain quiet.

Prince does not hold real power in national affairs,which did not lead to serious dioplamatic problems between Britain and China.

Good that he didn't in this case. He was able to say it as he saw it like a lot of people saw it, but was silenced by the "thought" police.

Personally I hope that the Prince may revise his views about China's regimes after he visiting China and talked to the people there. He should not make his assertions based on others' views.There is a culture difference and he knows that.I agree that he had deep thoughts for Hong Kong's people for good but he does not use a more dioplomic way to express it which saddened me.

I've been to China. I and the rest of our flight was escorted off of our plane by Chinese military and led to our next destination. There is no freedom there nor is there much trust. Then again, what have they to worry about? Keeping their dictatorship etc. Then again, this is getting too political to chat about in this forum.

Hong Kong was a wonderful place to visit before it was given back to China. Hordes of citizenry, both westerners and Chinese, left it in the years before it was given back to China for Canada, the US, Europe, Australia and yes Britain. There will be those who are happy there, but many who are not.

I got to meet President Jiang Zemin at the APEC 2000 Conference in Brunei in November 2000. Yes, he was nice and cordial; but, so was Hitler and Mussolini from what I've heard. The citizens are very nice people, but the population who support the government and the government itself is a different matter--no matter how diplomatic you are.

Again Charles' diaries were just that--his diaries. And, an interesting look into the real Prince's thoughts, ideas and opinions. A man that does have thoughts that are not given to him by courtiers or Blair. I'm glad to see and read that Charles thinks. Or, we might have rulers that think (quoting the monster Hitler), "what luck for the rulers that men do not think."

[love_cc]

thanks for your datailed reply, HRH Kimetha. I think what Prince Charles and you are saying:democracy and freedom of speech. Certainly the Prince should have both rights of his privacy and freedom of speech.

In my view, the process of democracy takes a course to develop and takes to time to happen. Unfornately China missed the best opportunity four hundreds years ago and agian Chinese people don't have great people like Washington, Jejamin and Jefferson to continue the prorgess of a democractic republican one hundred year ago. Chinese people are more aware of democray now but it takes time to improve the overall society. Chinese politics are very complex things because of deep-rooted thoughts of holding power by a sole party. Alway man rules not law rules.Again China cannot face another political crisis and so sometime strong forces to keep the society is necessary. Some Chinese people are too easily being provoked or misled and I guess too much passions in veins which causes a lot of problems.

Neither do I want to go too politics and this is not the theme of this forum.

[HRH Kimetha]

Originally Posted by love_cc

thanks for your datailed reply, HRH Kimetha.

I'm glad I didn't offend you, love_cc. Sometimes one can offend without aiming to. And, I am glad you were able to discern from my 'hotair' what I wanted to convey.