The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-28-2007, 01:38 PM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,398
Well, at least this editorial by Michele Hanson is a slice of honesty.... It's not really about Camilla or Diana, but it's about other people's funerals, memorial services, and the much ado about nothing that is made over these occasions.

Old 08-28-2007, 01:38 PM
pinkie40's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 423
Originally Posted by kimebear View Post
That would have been a lovely idea.
Why didn't Charles and Andrew get rid of their advisors when they started/allowed the spouses to get criticized and shredded to bits as far back as 1986 is far beyond my comprehension or reason. I vote for Sophie Wessex to handle the PR of the royal family from now on!

Old 08-28-2007, 01:41 PM
bbb's Avatar
bbb bbb is offline
Serene Highness
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lake texoma, United States
Posts: 1,060
Originally Posted by pinkie40 View Post
I am sure Camilla always has an alternative plan when she is cast aside because of Diana...I would suspect she goes up to her jewelry closet and counts her future crowns and daidems...checks her pulse with a smile...and then has a good,refreshing drink all the while thanking God she doesn't have to climb into a girdle and pantyhose in August.....and then measures her column inches of press.
being a native dallas girl myself- while i don't share your sentiments about camilla i do admire your wit and support your position on girdles and pantyhose.

wonderful post sesa- are we done yet? the thread title is no longer relevant. i blame clarence house, others blame the boys, others blame the media blah blah blah. "no good deed, goes unpunished" the biggest surprise to me who admires diana is how a dead woman still has the power to "bring down the crown" from the grave- do you think she would have had that much power now, if she had lived?? did she even have the power when she was alive, i know she was manipulative, i get that but any odds would always be with "the firm" after all she didn't die a HRH. imo this came down to people playing games at clarence house and media hot on the $$$ trail, perhaps thats one point we all can agree on- alot of people are making big bucks over the grave of a dead woman.
Old 08-28-2007, 04:13 PM
hornsen's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 535
Charles and Camilla's furious row over Diana memorial service | the Daily Mail

I was waiting for this article. More headline than substance...
Old 08-28-2007, 07:01 PM
gfg02's Avatar
Serene Highness
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: *******, Brazil
Posts: 1,325
Prince Charles hopeless judgement means he's not fit to be king

Prince Charles hopeless judgement means he's not fit to be king | the Daily Mail
If you find someone you love in your life, then hang on to that love. - Diana, Princess of Wales
Old 08-28-2007, 07:10 PM
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
The Mail understands that William has spoken at length to the Duchess of Cornwall about her decision to pull out of the service at the Guards Chapel.
A source close to the prince said he and Harry had apologised to Camilla for the debacle. "She told them not to worry and thanked the princes for inviting her in the first place." It has also emerged that Scotland Yard is considering pressing charges against some of those who made threats against Camilla, warning her not to attend the service.

Laundry lady Diana's early years to be revealed in new book by Prince William

Laundry lady Diana's early years to be revealed in new book by Prince William | the Daily Mail

I cannot believe it. Some of the crazy Diana hardcore wrote letters to threat against Camilla. I hope that we may give a better explanation about that in the future.
Old 08-28-2007, 07:23 PM
hornsen's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 535
Scotland Yard shouldn´t consider prosecutions. They should do it! You can blame those hardcore-fans for character assassination, insulting and cruelty! And the whole press pack additional! This whole campaign against Camilla is an incident for Amnesty International.
Old 08-28-2007, 07:32 PM
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 8,013
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
There are historians who believe the Duke of Cornwall-title to be higher than the Prince of Wales-title. They argue that The Duke of Cornwall always is the eldest son of the souverain while the Prince of Wales is the next in line. Under certain circumstances a grandson of the souverain can be the Prince of Wales (if his father died before his grandfather), but he can't be Duke of Cornwall.
Dear Jo of Palatine,
Well, the science of history is a broad concept. “In general, the sources of historical knowledge can be separated into three categories: what is written, what is said, and what is physically preserved, and historians often consult all three” (Wikipedia, n.d.). This entails a certain degree of impartiality and subjectivity in interpreting events of the past. So it comes as no surprise that some historians assign a higher priority to the title’ Duke and Duchess of Cornwall’. By the way, it makes me wonder why Prince Charles has not decided to take the same title, if it is so important.
Furthermore, I have read the opinion of a historian, who believed that new super-rich people of the UK (e.g., Roman Abramovich or Lakshmi Narayan Mittal) might demand titles and do have a right to do so after buying large estates in the UK. You do not think that this is possible, do you?
I hope I have not offended anybody’s sensitive nature.
Old 08-28-2007, 08:14 PM
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 210
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
Since so far, her actions have all been consistent with a woman who supports her husband, I assume this latest decision was in response to a request from a source she couldn't ignore, i.e., Buckingham Palace.
Poppycock! If Camilla was so insistent on supporting Charles, she would have been content to remain a discreet mistress. Instead she had to put herself front and foremost in the wife's position, even while Charles was still married to Diana.

What Diana would have had to 'accept' was not just a normal 'bit on the side' on her husband's part (which is bad enough ) but

a) a woman who took over her house as soon as she was out of it ,

b) bossed the servants ,

c) went through her things ,

d) knew all her friends and stayed with them with Charles as a couple ,

e) laughed about her behind her back ,

f) always called her 'that ridiculous creature ' ,

g) briefed the Press (Stuart Higgins of The Sun ) on anything she could find out to hurt Diana for 10 years .

h) Huge parties thrown by the husband for the mistress with all their friends invited

So that public humiliation and rejection and lack of support in the position of Princess of Wales was the main problem - not so much that Charles chose to 'play away'. Really Diana was in an IMPOSSIBLE position, and that is due more to Camilla's machinations, and lack of support for Charles' position.

Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
I assume this latest decision was in response to a request from a source she couldn't ignore, i.e., Buckingham Palace.
No doubt, Camilla has ignored many requests from Buckingham Palace in the past.

Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
She's never given the impression of a person who seeks the limelight or the approval of the public.
Ah, think again. According to Diana, Camilla said something like this to Diana, ~~"Why should you care if I have Charles, you have the adoration of every British man". This gives some indication of where Camilla's priorities were. Another indication I have of Camilla's love of the limelight, is all the bling she wore on her visit to the US which was a bit over the top.
Old 08-28-2007, 08:14 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 9,981
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
Well thats your opinion but I don't agree with it.

Neither do I.

Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
Her sons had every right to have this service they wanted to commorate the 10th anniversary of their mother's death. This division was caused by the media not them.

My God...I feel so sad for those kids! Why in the world would they not hold a memorial in honor of a mother they both adored?? For all we know it is the Prince of Wales who insisted that they invite their's hardly their fault that it caused such controversy!

The fault lies SOLELY with Charles and Clarence House for having the arrogance to insist that the DOC attend!
Old 08-28-2007, 08:19 PM
acdc1's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: somewhere in, United States
Posts: 2,033
Everyone complains about the hardcore Diana fanatics, but there are also some Camilla hardcores too. I think the Camilla hardcores were behaving much better in this situation, but probably because it wouldn't be hurting anyone's memory on their side. The Di fans got a bit rediculous, but they should calm down now that they have their way. We seem to have a good deal of both here on the forums.
Old 08-28-2007, 08:37 PM
Heir Presumptive
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,735
I think Clarence House handled the matter very poorly and Prince Charles should have known better than to force his wife into a questionable position on attending the service. Her presence would have been inappropriate, to say the least, and an insult to the memory of The Princess.

Camilla knew what she was getting into when she chose to marry Charles. She is a second wife, and no matter how much she is judged on her own merits and character, the shadow of Diana will always loom over until Charles becomes King. She is not the mother of Princes William and Harry and does not hold the same position in the eyes of the public.

They should have let sleeping dogs lie, instead of ignitng a firestorm of humiliation and controversy for The Duchess.
Old 08-28-2007, 08:43 PM
Polly's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 664
The title which carries most weight and prestige is, without doubt, The Prince of Wales, an earlier title than Duke of Cornwall. It's silly, in my opinion, to try and justify Camilla's title (if that's the plan) as she's been denied the right to call herself The Princess of Wales.

For those who do not think that it matters what she's called, I beg to differ. In the royal scheme of things it matters a great deal. We recall that in 1957 The Queen issued letter patent decreeing that her husband, the Duke of Edinburgh, would henceforth be known as The Prince Philip. This, it's been suggested, was to consolidate and confirm his position and to put courtiers and the Household firmly in their places. I hope that it's not too much longer before Camilla receives the same courtesy and acknowledgment of her unassailable, prestigious position as wife of The Prince of Wales.

As for Diana's sons wishing to honour their mother, I think that admirable. However, I do not understand why this had to be a Spielberg-spectacular type of event. Dare I say it - they are the ones who are persistent in reviving their mother's memory in a loud, public manner, which inevitably draws invidious comparisons between their mother and stepmother. Alternatively, they've allowed themselves to be used by being convinced that the whole public spectacle was a good thing! As it is, and because these services are predicated on spirituality and reverence, I hope and pray that the memorial service is a success, which is more than Clarence House deserves.

In the final analysis, and as I said over and over at the beginning of this thread, the only one who would bear the brunt of this badly-considered exercise was Camilla. It's not gratifying to say 'I was right' but any one of us with any knowledge whatsoever of PR practices and motives spotted this months ago. This whole shallow exercise was easily transparent to some us and many have been seriously disappointed, if not angry, with Clarence House.

Two things should happen immediately. First, Camilla should be given her proper, legal title, and second, Sir Michael Peat should be sacked! He should have been sent packing after the embarrassing mess he made of the wedding plans.
Old 08-28-2007, 08:45 PM
Heir Presumptive
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,735
She was forced to be styled by a lesser title because the public would not accept a second Princess of Wales, particularly one associated as a former mistress. It's just that simple.
Old 08-28-2007, 08:51 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,858
So we're never going to have another Princess of Wales again?
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
Old 08-28-2007, 08:56 PM
pinkie40's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 423
I still believe Prince William and Prince Harry did the correct and loving thing by at least offering the olive branch of peace to their stepmother. Diana was on a constant quest for healing and here we are a decade later and not much healing has taken place among us Diana Fans....Any criticism of Camilla is not helpful for Prince William's birthright, imo.
Old 08-28-2007, 09:01 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,454
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan View Post
So we're never going to have another Princess of Wales again?
No, Prince William's wife (hopefully Kate) will be the next and use the Princess of Wales title.
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
Old 08-28-2007, 09:06 PM
Imperial Majesty
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,873
Originally Posted by zhontella View Post
Poppycock! If Camilla was so insistent on supporting Charles, she would have been content to remain a discreet mistress.
While Charles was married, she did remain a discreet mistress. When they were free to marry and the Queen gave permission, they married. Camilla has supported Charles throughout their marriage and, from the Camillagate tapes, was being supportive while she was his mistress. Given that pattern, it would be very unlikely for her to back away from supporting him now.

No doubt, Camilla has ignored many requests from Buckingham Palace in the past.
Feel free to back that assertion up with something resembling fact.

Ah, think again. According to Diana, Camilla said...
Indeed. According to Diana. Not quite the same as a verified account of what Camilla actually said. When you can come up with something Camilla herself is known to have said, such as in a taped interview or an authorised biography, that might be a better basis to draw conclusions about her. Otherwise you're dealing with anecdotes that are, to put it very mildly, biased. I don't think I'm the one who needs to think again if that's the best you can do.
Old 08-28-2007, 09:10 PM
cde cde is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Marina del rey, United States
Posts: 234
Polly, I agree, Sir Michael Peat should be sacked but he should have been 2 years ago due to the wedding and now he is too close to retirement. At least he is good with Charles' money.

Beatrixfan, IMO there will never be another POW partly due to the Diana nutters and Wales itself.

Article questions Charles' fitness to become King

Elspeth, I think, maybe 20 pages ago, mentioned that she thought there would be a backlash on Charles. The above article isn't the first or only one. I don't think this is going to be over and forgotten in a few days.

IMO it is very disturbing Camilla's decision was finally decided 11th hour. (It doesn't matter what was going on at CH behind the scenes) It looks like the RF will listen and and apparently follow the demands of the The Diana Circle, assorted Diana nutters and the republican press if they make enought noise. This is the second time they have been listened to-The first time - Camilla being DOC and the princess consort title .

The Diana Circle's next stated goal is to stop Camilla becoming Queen.the republican press encourages the Diana "fans" in their extreme views. Maybe I am wrong but those two groups have won already and there is no reason to think they aren't going to get bolder, I am afraid it is going to get worse.
Old 08-28-2007, 09:11 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 12,779
Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion, but I fail to see the error in Willliam and Harry organizing an event to honor their mother. Since they were children when she died, I think its acceptable for them to plan an event to celebrate her life and achievements. I do hope, however, that we don't have a 15th, 20th, etc memorial. I think they won't do that but who knows.

By planning and hosting the event, it became an "official" celebration. Thus, you lessen the chance of any Tom, Dick or Harry deciding to plan a memorial. They are trying to control the situation so to speak.

As I stated before, it was logical for them to invite Camilla, it was illogical for her to accept. We have all been in the situation, where you "had to invite" someone but deep down you knew they weren't going to come. But again, they are not the "professionals " Clarence House should have known that she couldn't just sneak in the church and sit in the front of the church and no one would notice her.

Closed Thread

camilla, diana's death and funeral, duchess of cornwall, memorial, princess diana, princess of wales

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Correspondence to and from Charles and Camilla BeatrixFan The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 130 04-24-2015 12:16 PM
Orders of Service RoyalProtocol British Royals 26 08-12-2014 01:58 PM
Preparations for the 10th Anniversary Concert and Memorial Service sirhon11234 Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 529 08-31-2007 06:43 AM
Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall Current Events 16: July-September 2006 Warren Current Events Archive 201 09-11-2006 12:00 PM
Camilla & Charles: What Is Your Opinion Now? Princejohnny25 The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 573 06-13-2006 08:18 AM

Popular Tags
ancestry armstrong-jones belgian royal belgian royal family belgium chittagong cover-up crown princess victoria danish royalty dna dubai dutch royal family dutch royals family tree foundation future games haakon vii hill history house of glucksburg interesting introduction israel italian royal family jumma kids movie king salman list of rulers lithuanian palaces mailing mary: crown princess of denmark memoir monaco history monogram mountbatten nepal netflix norwegian royal family prince charles prince dimitri princess elizabeth princess margaret pronunciation queen mathilde queen maud rown royal balls royal court royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royal wedding saudi arabia serbian royal family spain spanish history startling new evidence stuart sweden swedish royalty thailand tracts united states of america unsubscribe videos von hofmannsthal wedding gown

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:50 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises