"Rebel Prince: The Power, Passion and Defiance of Prince Charles" by Tom Bower (2018)

[Nico]

The Difficult Past between Camilla, Charles and The Queen:
TOM BOWER: The Queen’s Cold War against Camilla | Daily Mail Online

How sneaky to post something like this...
For me it's the confirmation that this book is pure garbage. How on earth the author could know some private dialogues between Charles and the Queen ?
HM didn't speak to camilla after the 2005 wedding ? She pronounced a speech for the couple !
"difficult past" ? Give me a break ! Looks like a scenario for a lifetime movie (Sarah pursuing Charles with a bible ????!!!!!!, i mean, really ?).
This book was tailor-made for the readers of the Daily Mail (and the American ones with that).
Penny Junor's book was panned because it was seen as biased (and far too anti Diana so to speak). And now magic, magic we have the exact opposite and of course it's the ultimate tell-all book about a "difficult past".
Ah i laugh !

 

[Dman]

How sneaky to post something like this...
For me it's the confirmation that this book is pure garbage. How on earth the author can now some private dialogues between Charles and the Queen ?
HM didn't speak to camilla after the 2005 wedding ? She pronounced a speech for the couple !
"difficult past" ? Give me a break ! Looks like a scenario for a lifetime movie (Sarah pursuing Charles with a bible ????!!!!!!, i mean, really ?).
This book was tailor-made for the readers of the Daily Mail (and the American ones with that).
Penny Junor's book was panned because it was seen as biased (and far too anti Diana so to speak). And now magic, magic we have the exact opposite and of course it's the ultimate tell-all book about a "difficult past".
Ah i laugh !

There’s a lot of made up stuff. That’s expected in these royal books. Lord knows we’ve dealt with Penny Junor stuff. Although we do know that Camilla wasn’t in favor with The Queen and Queen Mother. It was all a hard pill to swallow for some time. Pretty much the same sentiment from the public and media.

As I said before, “Mark Bolland’s Campaign worked.”

 

[Nico]

There’s a lot of made up stuff. That’s expected in these royal books. Lord knows we’ve dealt with Penny Junor stuff. Although we do know that Camilla wasn’t in favor with The Queen and Queen Mother. It was all a hard pill to swallow for some time. Pretty much the same sentiment from the public and media.

"Penny Junor stuff". How interesting. Maybe it was a bit too "pro-Charles" for your personnal tastes i guess.
Well be happy! Tom Bower's materpiece seems made for you
Enjoy ...

 

[Dman]

"Penny Junor stuff". How interesting. Maybe it was a bit too "pro-Charles" for your personnal tastes i guess.
Well be happy! Tom Bower's materpiece seems made for you
Enjoy ...

Nope. I don’t care about any of it. Just posting about the article.

Nico, we all know about the drama that got Camilla to where she is today. Let’s not act like she sailed into royal life on the Royal Yacht Britannia. The facts isn’t pretty, no matter what side you’re on.

You’re talking to a pro-Charles guy. So don’t pull that stuff with me.

 

[Nico]

Nope. I don’t care about any of it. Just posting about the article.

Nico, we all know about the drama that got Camilla to where she is today. Let’s not act like she sailed into royal life on the Royal Yacht Britannia. The facts isn’t pretty, no matter what side you’re on.

You’re talking to a pro-Charles guy. So don’t pull that stuff with me.

And you made a point to post the most dubious stories of a "difficult past" from the most dubious book. But thank you very much

Just a bit hypocritical maybe ?(just a bit, i'm talking to a pro-Charles after all).

Well done Tom Bower , we are talking about your book ...

 

[Dman]

And you made a point to post the most dubious stories of a "difficult past" from the most dubious book. But thank you very much

Just a bit hypocritical maybe ?(just a bit, i'm talking to a pro-Charles after all).

Well done Tom Bower , we are talking about your book ...

Like I’m the only one that’s posting articles. Hell, I didn’t start this thread. Try again, Nico. None of the drama that went down is pretty.

 

[Nico]

If you say so.
Hopeless ...

 

[Mbruno]

Whatever their past history may be, the Queen seems to have resigned herself to the fact that Camilla is the PoW's legal wife and should be treated accordingly. That is why Camilla was made a PC and a GCVO.

I have no doubt that it would be politically better for the future of the monarchy if Charles renounced his succession rights, but that would be a difficult process nowadays (with so many Commonwealth realms) and is totally unlikely to happen. Charles could take the easy path though and simply convert to Catholicism. Most people would thank him .

 

[Osipi]

I have no doubt that it would be politically better for the future of the monarchy if Charles renounced his succession rights, but that would be a difficult process nowadays (with so many Commonwealth realms) and is totally unlikely to happen. Charles could take the easy path though and simply convert to Catholicism. Most people would thank him .

Then again, should any of the events happen that you've pointed out actually happen, I think it would be the first gate opened into abolishing the monarchy in total.

 

[Mbruno]

.

Then again, should any of the events happen that you've pointed out actually happen, I think it would be the first gate opened into abolishing the monarchy in total.

Of course not. We have already been over this before: King Juan Carlos and King Albert II abdicated and the monarchies of Belgium and Spain (two very difficult countries) are in fact much stronger today because of that. Likewise, Edward VIII abdicated and that was not the end of the British monarch. On the contrary, despite his personal limitations, George VI was a much better monarch for the times he lived in than his brother would ever have been. Could you imagine Edward VIII as king during World War II for example ?

Despite what their title may say, monarchs nowadays don't rule by the grace of God, but rather by the consent of the people. The debate on whether a monarch can be removed by the people without necessarily abolishing the monarch was already settled in England way back in 1688. There is no need to reopen that debate again.

 

[Nico]

Whatever their past history may be, the Queen seems to have resigned herself to the fact that Camilla is the PoW's legal wife and should be treated accordingly. That is why Camilla was made a PC and a GCVO.

I have no doubt that it would be politically better for the future of the monarchy if Charles renounced his succession rights, but that would be a difficult process nowadays (with so many Commonwealth realms) and is totally unlikely to happen. Charles could take the easy path though and simply convert to Catholicism. Most people would thank him .

Why ? Because the Daily Mail and its (mainly American) readers decided that Charles was a loose canon ?
As anyone seen some kind of public outcry, petitions or anything else against the Prince of Wales in the UK ? The Guardian tried once with the so called "spider letters "and it failed miserabily.

There's a deliberate campaign to denigrate the Prince of Wales and his work. And of course it serves some people inclined to vengeance, for the reasons we know too well.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

The Difficult Past between Camilla, Charles and The Queen:
TOM BOWER: The Queen’s Cold War against Camilla | Daily Mail Online

Thanks Dman.

The first thing I thought of after reading this article was-believe it or not-the Cambridge wedding at Westminster Abbey in April 2011. Her Majesty was in the vestibule of the Abbey greeting various people including the PoW and Camilla.

All bowed and/or curtsied and received a warm smile of acknowledgement from HM. When she came to Charles he kissed her hand and then both her cheeks as is customary. Next came his wife Camilla, who gave a deep curtsey.

What happened next was unmistakable...the Queen's smile quickly evaporated into the coldest stare and most perfunctory of nods. I was watching live and my mouth dropped.

It was the talk of many of the Royal message boards and even on NBC's Today Show with Kathy Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb.

I will never ever forget it. ..it's one of those times I felt truly sorry for Camilla.

 

[Nico]

For heaven's sake are we still talking about some so called public "snub" or "shade" from the Queen toward Camilla ?
The Queen didn't kiss Camilla because of her HAT !
As for HM's "coldest stare" :

http://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Queen+Elizabeth+II+Royal+Wedding+Carriage+9GKjY7TOSYJl.jpg

And now i presume someone will bring back the "fact" that the Queen wore white (in fact yellow) at C&C wedding to upstage the bride ?

Depressing ...

 

[Moonmaiden23]

That's a nice photo Nico but I saw what I saw in Westminster Abbey that morning and so did many others. We all cannot have imagined it to the point where it was discussed on a major news outlet the very next morning.

I am not here to diss Camilla, who I have come to appreciate even if I still don't like the way she handled herself during the so called War of the Wales.

 

[Dman]

Thanks Dman.

The first thing I thought of after reading this article was-believe it or not-the Cambridge wedding at Westminster Abbey in April 2011. Her Majesty was in the vestibule of the Abbey greeting various people including the PoW and Camilla.

All bowed and/or curtsied and received a warm smile of acknowledgement from HM. When she came to Charles he kissed her hand and then both her cheeks as is customary. Next came his wife Camilla, who gave a deep curtsey.

What happened next was unmistakable...the Queen's smile quickly evaporated into the coldest stare and most perfunctory of nods. I was watching live and my mouth dropped.

It was the talk of many of the Royal message boards and even on NBC's Today Show with Kathy Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb.

I will never ever forget it. ..it's one of those times I felt truly sorry for Camilla.

The Queen and Camilla could not kiss due to their hats.

Their relationship improved over time and she’s now on good form with her daughter-in-law. It’s just things we’re on shaky ground during the Wales dating years and leading up to the marriage. That’s all in the past now though.

 

[Muhler]

I have with considerable amusement read the excerpts on Daily Mail.

It's such a dramatized and one sided Charles-bashing that it's actually comical.

Considering the exceptional number of quotes, I can't help being a little bit suspicious as to whether author has been, shall we say, liberal in including what may have been said.
It looks more like a manuscript to a poor drama than a serious attempt to get behind the person, Charles - for better or worse. Because of course the man has faults. People who don't have fault can sign up for sainthood at the Vatican, third office to the left.

So I would like to read it for the entertainment value, but don't expect me to take it serious.

 

[PetticoatLane]

I've not read many of the details but overall my feeling is that much of this is the sort of stuff that's already kind of public knowledge.

Charles and Camilla had a relationship while both married - not new.
Charles is rather spoiled and likes the finer things in life - not new.
Relationships within the RF are occasionally fraught and then improve over time (and vice versa) - not new.
Charles feels unfulfilled in having had to wait so long with no 'real' role - not new.
The Cambridges are closer with the Middletons than C&C - not new.

I think what we fail to remember on this forum is that the vast, vast majority of people don't think of the royals at all. They have little in the way of a strong opinion about them, negative or positive.

I think I speak for the majority in the UK when I say we can live with a shortish reign of Charles III and even Queen Camilla. William, Kate and their children are the future of the Monarchy.

Charles giving up his succession rights would be, if nothing else, a catastrophic and permanent betrayal of William who undoubtedly wants as many years with his young family as possible before the job overtakes his life.

 

[Pranter]

That's a nice photo Nico but I saw what I saw in Westminster Abbey that morning and so did many others. We all cannot have imagined it to the point where it was discussed on a major news outlet the very next morning.

I am not here to diss Camilla, who I have come to appreciate even if I still don't like the way she handled herself during the so called War of the Wales.

I found this..still looking for the other pic/video.

LaRae

 

[Nico]

That's a nice photo Nico but I saw what I saw in Westminster Abbey that morning and so did many others. We all cannot have imagined it to the point where it was discussed on a major news outlet the very next morning.

I am not here to diss Camilla, who I have come to appreciate even if I still don't like the way she handled herself during the so called War of the Wales.

In fact you summarized the situation perfectly : there will ALWAYS be a "but" concerning Camilla (and Charles) for a part of the public (and sorry to say mainly the American one). The Queen can cover them with very public signs of affection, honnors etc... it won't change a single thing. One day someone brings a dubious book and/or a phony theory and here we go again…
Sometimes i wonder how can they get up in the morning : « Seen the news today ? « Yep same old stories ».

I found this..still looking for the other pic/video.

LaRae

Not a biased video ...at all lol

 

[Gawin]

I found this..still looking for the other pic/video.

LaRae

I don't see this: "the Queen's smile quickly evaporated into the coldest stare and most perfunctory of nods." And I didn't see Camilla lean in for a kiss, either, as the text claims. She dropped and curtsied.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I don't see this: "the Queen's smile quickly evaporated into the coldest stare and most perfunctory of nods." And I didn't see Camilla lean in for a kiss, either, as the text claims. She dropped and curtsied.

That's what I saw too...

The Queen has seemed very friendly with Camilla on a number of occasions. I don't think she dislikes her, I do think she wasn't happy with either her son or Camilla for while but that is in the past.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

The Queen and Camilla could not kiss due to their hats.

Their relationship improved over time and she’s now on good form with her daughter-in-law. It’s just things we’re on shaky ground during the Wales dating years and leading up to the marriage. That’s all in the past now though.

Hats or no hats, it was the look and the attitude of HM towards her daughter-in-law that I found striking, given her warmth toward the other persons she had just greeted. I was not concerned at all about the lack of a kiss.

I am sure that HM has reconciled herself with the situation and that the two women get on very well...at least I hope that's the case.

 

[MARG]

For heaven's sake are we still talking about some so called public "snub" or "shade" from the Queen toward Camilla ?
The Queen didn't kiss Camilla because of her HAT !
As for HM's "coldest stare" :

Depressing ...

True, however, I find the video that Pranter provided very illuminating. She is right, HM does give a very subtle head shake, but there was no "coldest stare". The Queen's smile remained absolutely unchanged and somehow I think this is a situation that has been encountered on several occasions beforehand, to give it a shot or not is HM's call. Judging by her hat brim and Camilla's brim . . . good call.

Dear Lord the tripe posted in the Mail so far confirms my decision not to bother even checking it out. It's pure Fantasyland, complete with wicked witches, frosty queens, evil stepmother's, etc. ad nauseum. I cannot believe that people actually believe any of it.

Heavens Osipi what are you thinking. Charles renounce his succession rights? Why on earth should he, unless of course, you believe he whines in strange places with even stranger people, about how long he has had to wait. A reporter once asked the same question to which he replied that since his succession was dependant on his mother's death, he was in no hurry.

Actually, if he wanted out, he would have to become king and then abdicate in favour of his heir. We all really want the death of our Queen, followed by a new king that throws the towel in. I don't think so. This is where UK and Commonwealth citizens differ from US citizens. We have succession, you have an election!

 

[gerry]

True, however, I find the video that Pranter provided very illuminating. She is right, HM does give a very subtle head shake, but there was no "coldest stare". The Queen's smile remained absolutely unchanged and somehow I think this is a situation that has been encountered on several occasions beforehand, to give it a shot or not is HM's call. Judging by her hat brim and Camilla's brim . . . good call.

Dear Lord the tripe posted in the Mail so far makes confirms my decision not to bother even checking it out. It's pure Fantasyland, complete with wicked witches, frosty queens, evil stepmother's, etc. ad nauseum. I cannot believe that people actually believe any of it.

Heavens Osipi what are you thinking. Charles renounce his succession rights? Why on earth should he, unless of course, you believe he whines in strange places with even stranger people, about how long he has had to wait. A reporter once asked the same question to which he replied that since his succession was dependant on his mother's death, he was in no hurry.

Actually, if he wanted out, he would have to become king and then abdicate in favour of his heir. We all really want the death of our Queen, followed by a new king that throws the towel in. I don't think so. This is where UK and Commonwealth citizens differ from US citizens. We have succession, you have an election!

Bravo, well said and written! Just watched a Toronto production of the play Charles III that also dealt with a death, succession and abdication scenario in the UK and the audience reaction was very interesting. It is not often one experiences the general public's reaction to the PoW, but in the QandA after the show, there was a clear support for Charles III and nothing positive said about the playwright's point of view beyond his beautiful use of iambic pentametre! I also read the extracts of this particular book published in the Daily Fail and, like Muhler, was highly entertained. I am imagining a hostess being faced with the Prince of Wales's bed and thinking pigs might fly!

 

[Pranter]

In fact you summarized the situation perfectly : there will ALWAYS be a "but" concerning Camilla (and Charles) for a part of the public (and sorry to say mainly the American one). The Queen can cover them with very public signs of affection, honnors etc... it won't change a single thing. One day someone brings a dubious book and/or a phony theory and here we go again…
Sometimes i wonder how can they get up in the morning : « Seen the news today ? « Yep same old stories ».



Not a biased video ...at all lol

Doesn't matter what they say....I didn't even play the volume. Just watched the situation to see what happened.



LaRae

 

[AdmirerUS]

I don't see this: "the Queen's smile quickly evaporated into the coldest stare and most perfunctory of nods." And I didn't see Camilla lean in for a kiss, either, as the text claims. She dropped and curtsied.

Agreed. Her eyes actually twinkle as she is nodding "oops, no the hats are too awkward for a kiss." And Cams did not miss a beat - so well done for her as well.

 

[Lady Nimue]

I don't see this: "the Queen's smile quickly evaporated into the coldest stare and most perfunctory of nods." And I didn't see Camilla lean in for a kiss, either, as the text claims. She dropped and curtsied.

Same here. And I was looking!

Agreed. Her eyes actually twinkle as she is nodding "oops, no the hats are too awkward for a kiss." And Cams did not miss a beat - so well done for her as well.

Saw the same thing. No "smile quickly evaporat[ing] into the coldest stare and most perfunctory of nods."

 

[royal rob]

My daughter in law who doesn’t follow royals watched the wedding because she had just become engaged and wanted to see what a royal one was like. She text me saying Wow the Queen just blew Camilla off what’s the story ? I saw it too

 

[Moonmaiden23]

royal rob it turns out that scores of TV viewers including myself , your daughter-in-law and even two newscasters hallucinated the entire scene.

HM adores Camilla, in fact always has. She has never harbored an unkind word...nay...an unkind THOUGHT for the virtuous and upright woman who rescued her son from a living nightmare of marriage to an irredeemably evil harpy, a she-wolf!

And by the way, the PoW is not a well meaning man with faults of his own. He is a truly uncontrollable crusader who has shunned his life long aristocratic buddies likely Nicholas Soames, the late Andrew and Debo, Duke and Duchess of Devonshire, the late Gerald Duke of Westminster and others like these conservative Establishment stiffs in favor of "progressive" types like Tony Blair and Bono and Sir Richard Branson.

He also enjoys a spartan existence at Clarence House, Highgrove, Birkhall, and the Castle of Mey.

The knives are out for him, so no one will ever admit all this, you know.

Just embrace it...at least for the purpose of this thread.

 

[Dman]

It’s pretty much well known that The Queen’s relationship with Camilla started off on very shaky ground. Everything wasn’t smooth sailing from the start. It took time, advise and pressure from Charles and the Mark Borland Campaign, to get The Queen to come around on accepting Camilla’s presence in Charles life publicly.

Now their personal and public relationship is very good footing. The Queen did make knight Camilla Dame Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order. She’s also a member of the Privy Council. Call me crazy, but this tells me, and a lot others, that everything is good between them today.