The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f44/)
-   -   Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall: Visit to the US - November 1-8, 2005 (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f44/prince-of-wales-and-duchess-of-cornwall-visit-to-the-us-november-1-8-2005-a-7662.html)

GrandDuchess 10-25-2005 01:10 PM

Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall: Visit to the US - November 1-8, 2005
 
Here is a thread were we can post information, articles and pictures from the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall's visit to the US that will take place very soon.

Please remember to observe and follow the TRF Posting Rules & Guidelines.

corazon 10-25-2005 02:07 PM

but Bush will be here in argentina in november5 for the cumbre de las americas.

pollyemma 10-25-2005 02:17 PM

as far as i've heard, bush will only be playing host to C and C on November 2. first for a lunch in the afternoon and then for a large formal dinner in the evening.

here's a brief interchange from an online chat with one of dc's gossip columnists.

---
Arlington, Va.: What's the buzz on the visits of Charles and Camilla? What will they be doing in D.C.? Who's going to the White House dinner?
reliable source: The details are very hush-hush. What we know so far: The Newlyweds will go to New York first, where they'll visit Ground Zero. Charles was scheduled to make a trip in 2001 that was cancelled, and this is meant to honor the many British citizens who died at the World Trade Center. On Wednesday, Nov. 2 they'll be in Washington, where they'll have lunch at the White House, as well as a fancy state dinner that night. No leaks on who's invited, but we assume the competition is fierce.

They're staying at the embassy with Ambassador David Manning and his wife, Catherine, and there will probably also be a dinner there the following hosted by the prince. There are hints of visits to educational type venues, but nothing definite. We'll share as soon as we know more.
---

and so will I;)

pollyemma 10-25-2005 02:46 PM

here's the list of engagements

https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/imag...ary-header.gif https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/images/nav/pow-logo.gif https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/images/blank.gifhttps://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/images/greendot.gifhttps://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/images/blank.gifhttps://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/images/nav/reddot.gifhttps://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/images/blank.gifhttps://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/diary.html


Wednesday, 26th October
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will give a reception for Americans living in the United Kingdom representing the Arts, Culture, Business, the Media and Public Service, in advance of Their Royal Highness’s official visit to the United States, Clarence House, London.
Tuesday, 1st November
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will visit the World Trade Centre site, New York.
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will dedicate a centre stone for the British Memorial Garden, New York
  • The Prince of Wales will meet Kofi Annan, UN Secretary General at an event on Youth Enterprise hosted by the UK Mission to the UN and the United Nations Development Programme, The United Nations, New York.
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will attend a Reception hosted by the British Consul General at the Museum of Modern Art, New York.
Wednesday, 2nd November
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will attend a lunch given by President and Mrs Bush at the White House, Washington DC.
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall, accompanied by Mrs Bush, will plant a tree to commemorate their visit to the School for Educational Evolution and Development, Washington DC.
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will attend a dinner given by President and Mrs Bush at the White House, Washington DC.
Thursday, 3rd November
  • The Duchess of Cornwall, accompanied by The Prince of Wales, will attend a seminar on tackling osteoporosis, The National Institutes for Health, Washington DC.
  • The Prince of Wales, accompanied by The Duchess of Cornwall, will give a speech when he receives the Vincent Scully Prize and view exhibitions of The Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment and The Prince’s School of Traditional Arts, National Buildings Museum, Washington DC.
  • The Prince of Wales will attend a Seminar on “Faith and Social Responsibility”, Georgetown University, Washington DC.
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will attend a Reception hosted by Her Majesty’s Ambassador to the United States of America, Washington DC.
Friday, 4th November
  • The Prince of Wales, accompanied by The Duchess of Cornwall, will lay a wreath to commemorate the 60th Anniversary of the end of the Second World War at a new Second World War Memorial, Washington DC.
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will meet children participating in a workshop at the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington DC.
Saturday, 5th November
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will visit the Point Reyes Farmers’ Market, Point Reyes Station, Marin County.
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will attend a lunch with representatives of the local farming community at an organic farm, Marin County.
Sunday, 6th November
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall attend a performance of “Beach Blanket Babylon”, Club Fugazi, San Francisco.
Monday, 7th November
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will meet children growing and cooking food at the “Edible School Yard”, Martin Luther King Jr. Middle School, Berkeley.
  • The Prince of Wales, accompanied by The Duchess of Cornwall, will give a speech at a Seminar on Environmental issues, The Ferry Building, San Francisco.
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will attend a dinner hosted by the Mayor of San Francisco and the British Consul General with members of the business community, de Young Museum, San Francisco.
Tuesday, 8th November
  • The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will meet people being helped by a project to tackle homelessness, Empress Hotel, San Francisco.
https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/diary.html

ysbel 10-25-2005 07:58 PM

Whirlwind US tour for Royal pair
 
From the BBC:

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4376778.stm

pollyemma 10-26-2005 09:44 AM

from The Washington Post

Prince Charles to Accept Scully Prize at Building Museum

Wednesday, October 26, 2005; Page C10
Prince Charles will accept the prestigious Vincent Scully Prize at the National Building Museum while making an official visit to Washington with his wife, Camilla, next week.
In announcing the award yesterday, the museum sought to recognize the prince's long-standing interest in architecture and urban planning.

https://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-s...nlarge_tab.gif
https://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-d...5102501515.jpg Prince Charles will be honored for his efforts toward historical preservation and urban planning. (Matt Dunham - AP)

Harry's polo shirt 10-26-2005 11:30 AM

well deserved!

Royal Fan 10-26-2005 12:35 PM

I Wish them all the best as they visit my country . Hope everyone will be nice and Friendly to them

maryshawn 10-26-2005 02:32 PM

Well, if the supermarket tabloids are any indication, all will be well. Some of the headlines I saw the other night were all about Camilla's new style and were very pro-Charles and Camilla as a couple.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Royal Fan
I Wish them all the best as they visit my country . Hope everyone will be nice and Friendly to them


Lady Marmalade 10-26-2005 10:34 PM

Sunday night on 60 Minutes is the big night we Americans on here have been waiting for!! The first American interview with Prince Charles in so many years.

Humera 10-27-2005 12:18 AM

upcoming Canadian visit?
 
I just heard this on the news.
Prince Charles and the Duchess Cornwall really wanted their first overseas visit to be to a commonwealth nation and felt that Canada would've been a perfect choice. But because the visit would've fallen in November, the Canadian government felt that the timing might've been all wrong, politically, and so nixed the idea.
Instead Charles and Camilla are confining themselves to the US.
Now all of this info. comes from sources at the palace via the CBC's London bureau chief.
So while there are no official dates yet, a visit to Canada will happen soon. Most likely after we've had an election which will be sometime next year (unless something happens this fall)

Harry's polo shirt 10-27-2005 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ~*~Humera~*~
I just heard this on the news.
Prince Charles and the Duchess Cornwall really wanted their first overseas visit to be to a commonwealth nation and felt that Canada would've been a perfect choice. But because the visit would've fallen in November, the Canadian government felt that the timing might've been all wrong, politically, and so nixed the idea.
Instead Charles and Camilla are confining themselves to the US.
Now all of this info. comes from sources at the palace via the CBC's London bureau chief.
So while there are no official dates yet, a visit to Canada will happen soon. Most likely after we've had an election which will be sometime next year (unless something happens this fall)

I don't believe a word of it! What is "confining" supposed to mean anyway! Their first overseas trip would make a bigger impact by visiting the US and WTC site, than visiting Canada.

Harry's polo shirt 10-27-2005 12:31 AM

please don't take offense by the "than visiting Canada" part..I didn't mean it like that..

Humera 10-27-2005 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry's polo shirt
I don't believe a word of it! What is "confining" supposed to mean anyway! Their first overseas trip would make a bigger impact by visiting the US and WTC site, than visiting Canada.

perhaps you misunderstood what I said. Canada is a commonwealth country. Thats the significance. They wanted their first visit to be to a commonwealth nation. This isnt supposed to take anything away from their US visit. I hope it didnt come across that way. But the political climate here is unstable which is why such a visit couldnt happen right now. When the Queen was here a few months ago, there were similar fears and some people thought she wouldn't come. The royal family doesnt like to involve itself in politics. That visit, however, was a major one and couldn't be cancelled over such short notice. This time though the Canadian government seems to have given the palace a heads up.
This isn't gossip Im repeating its from an official source. I doubt the CBC would report it especially if it wasnt true. It would be like the BBC in the UK reporting gossip.

Harry's polo shirt 10-27-2005 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ~*~Humera~*~
perhaps you misunderstood what I said. Canada is a commonwealth country. Thats the significance. They wanted their first visit to be to a commonwealth nation. This isnt supposed to take anything away from their US visit. I hope it didnt come across that way. But the political climate here is unstable which is why such a visit couldnt happen right now. When the Queen was here a few months ago, there were similar fears and some people thought she wouldn't come. The royal family doesnt like to involve itself in politics. That visit, however, was a major one and couldn't be cancelled over such short notice. This time though the Canadian government seems to have given the palace a heads up.

oh...sorry I misunderstood..I was thrown by it sounding like the US trip was a "oh well, we have to visit somewere" decision..

Humera 10-27-2005 12:47 AM

thats okay. And I didnt mean for it to sound that way. I think this just means they're only visiting the US instead of visting Canada and then the US.

Lady Marmalade 10-27-2005 01:18 AM

Hi Humera,

You mentioned before that it could be they would want to wait to visit until the elections are over in your country?

I could see that as the Queen almost ran into a politically sensitive moment when she was in your country earlier this year. There was thought an election might have to have been called while she was there.

Is that true?

Nicole

Humera 10-27-2005 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
Hi Humera,
You mentioned before that it could be they would want to wait to visit until the elections are over in your beautiful country?
I could see that as the Queen almost ran into a politically sensitive moment when she was in your great country earlier this year. There was thought an election might have to have been called while she was there.
Is that true?
Nicole

Hi Nicole,
yes you're right. At first I thought Charles and Camilla could come to Canada in November because we'll probably have an election next year, not next month.
But then I saw the news again and its because the plans for this visit were discussed a few months ago, at that point the Canadian government felt that we might be into an election campaign by Fall 2005, so thats why they told the palace to not schedule the visit for November. Now we know that there wont be an election next month. But no one was sure about that a few months ago when the visit was being planned.

The Queen's visit faced similar uncertainty earlier this year. Her visit was around 10 days long and during that time there were fears that Canada's minority government would be defeated and an election would have to be called. (There was a similar situation decades ago and at that time the royal visit was cancelled)
But the Queen was supposed to attend centennial celebrations for 2 of our provinces and a lot of planning had gone into all the festivities. Fortunately she came anyway after consulting our PM and there was no election.

I guess the Canadian government wanted to avoid a repeat of the political uncertainty surrounding another royal visit and felt it would be safer if Charles and Camilla postpone their trip until after the election.

Incas 10-27-2005 08:39 AM

I saw this on the Prince of Wales website. There was a pre-tour reception at Clarence House. Looks like the Prince and Duchess were busy, same day had visits from the Norwegian prince and princess.
https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/gall...reception.html

Of course, here is another take on the reception from Mirror:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_obje...name_page.html

from Reuters:
https://today.reuters.co.uk/news/news...IN-CAMILLA.xml

seto 10-27-2005 10:10 AM

The press I believe is the only one doing any comparing of camilla and Diana. I hope they enjoy their visit. I think people will want to meet camilla she is a royal and those that are into the royal family will enjoy the visit.

tiaraprin 10-28-2005 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seto
The press I believe is the only one doing any comparing of camilla and Diana. I hope they enjoy their visit. I think people will want to meet camilla she is a royal and those that are into the royal family will enjoy the visit.

Not all Royal watchers will be running to see them. They will be only 35 miles from where I live and I most certainly am not going.

Lady Marmalade 10-28-2005 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiaraprin
Not all Royal watchers will be running to see them. They will be only 35 miles from where I live and I most certainly am not going.

Indeed, that seems to be a general view taken. I am posting a link to yesterday's Guardian...just copy and paste in your address box, it should work.

chttps://www.guardian.co.uk/monarchy/s...601322,00.html

The general feeling towards bringing the other woman, or other man, whom you married to dinner, is still not as socially acceptable in our society...no matter how much good she has done or happy they are. We are still quite prudish in this country in that respect.

ysbel 10-28-2005 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
The general feeling towards bringing the other woman, or other man, whom you married to dinner, is still not as socially acceptable in our society...no matter how much good she has done or happy they are. We are still quite prudish in this country in that respect.

I would have to respectfully disagree, Lady Marmalade. While at family gatherings, Americans would be show some distaste and distance; for purely political or social gatherings, the other woman who married the man is not necessarily shunned in this country.

When Donald Trump ran off with Marla Maples, it was scandalous at first but they were received well pretty much anywhere they went afterwards. The only cases I know of where a married partner was shunned by society was during the breakup of Loni Anderson and Burt Reynolds and then the breakup between Mia Farrow and Woody Allen. But these men allegedly did a lost worse than the charges levied against Charles and Camilla. Burt was rumoured to have been physically violent with Loni and Woody ran off with his 17 year old foster daughter.

These are entirely more serious circumstances.

seto 10-28-2005 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel
I would have to respectfully disagree, Lady Marmalade. While at family gatherings, Americans would be show some distaste and distance; for purely political or social gatherings, the other woman who married the man is not necessarily shunned in this country.

When Donald Trump ran off with Marla Maples, it was scandalous at first but they were received well pretty much anywhere they went afterwards. The only cases I know of where a married partner was shunned by society was during the breakup of Loni Anderson and Burt Reynolds and then the breakup between Mia Farrow and Woody Allen. But these men allegedly did a lost worse than the charges levied against Charles and Camilla. Burt was rumoured to have been physically violent with Loni and Woody ran off with his 17 year old foster daughter.

These are entirely more serious circumstances.




In america your first wife was your first and the next is accepted it is your choice to remarry. Of course in some cirles friends take sides but for the most part it really isn't a big deal.

Harry's polo shirt 10-28-2005 03:43 PM

I think people will be respectful (hopefully) to Camilla, but she is still "the other women" in many eyes. It doesn't matter if they are married, there love story doesn't sound romantic to many americans, like it does in other countries.

I think that political gatherings are more accepting to "other women", than family gatherings....look at Bill Clinton. Although Monica has been beaten down by the media.

When Monica did the interview with Barbara Walters, Barbara said that after the interview she got more comments from views who were asking what Monica's lip gloss was!!:eek: :confused: :eek: You can interpret (sp?) that yourself, but I think many american's forgive rather quickly or just don't care.

BeatrixFan 10-28-2005 03:47 PM

Re:
 
If people are shallow enough to create trouble over private matter that has nothing to do with them then their lives but be extremely empty - and to protest about such a trivial matter is ridiculous. We all have an opinion but creating a scene based on the fact that someone you don't know personally had an affair and got remarried is foolish on the part of those who do the shouting. Especially in America where the divorce rate is very high.

tiaraprin 10-28-2005 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
If people are shallow enough to create trouble over private matter that has nothing to do with them then their lives but be extremely empty - and to protest about such a trivial matter is ridiculous. We all have an opinion but creating a scene based on the fact that someone you don't know personally had an affair and got remarried is foolish on the part of those who do the shouting. Especially in America where the divorce rate is very high.

Unfortunately, it is not a private matter, it is a matter that has rocked the British Monarchy and hence the people under Her Majesty's sovereignty and the Commonwealth. It is not a trivial matter in terms of the Monarchy. While the Monarchy must grow and adapt to its time, There were still certain ideas and traditions that had yet to be changed until the unfortunate collapse of the Wales' marriage. When Charles and Diana married, it was supposed to be forever no matter if they were miserable. All the circumstances of that marriage's collapse were extreme, brutal, and cruel to all involved. Charles & Camilla have gotten their cake and they are eating it while Diana never had the chance to live her life. William and Harry were motherless at young ages. Complaints are made that William is not a suitable heir, and Harry has done drugs and parties a great deal. Perhaps without the guidance of a loving mother and the absence of a father who is off on the royal rounds may account for these "lacks" in William's and Harry's characters. It surely affected Charles. His relationship with his parents (especially his father) are not good, he married Diana under duress and that was an unmitigated disaster. He couldn't find a wife he could tolerate until his first one died tragically and his mistress divorced her first husband. It is a disgrace.

While the divorce rate is high in my country, there are some of us who do take marriage seriously. While I am not a staunch anti-divorce person, I still think one must make every possible effort to save a marriage until there is no option left but divorce.

BeatrixFan 10-28-2005 04:18 PM

Re:
 
I don't see that it did rock the British Monarch but if it did then it rocked the BRITISH monarch - not the American. Charles and Camilla certainly do not need the approval of the yanks - they have the British seal of approval from everyone who matters and that is all that matters.

Divorce isn't a huge issue. Anne, Andrew, Charles, Henry VIII - they've all divorced and the Monarchy's still here isn't it? And to suggest that Charles should have stayed manicled to Diana even though he was unhappy is as impractical as it is cruel.

Diana did have a chance to live her life but is this the topic for a Diana/Charles/Camilla argument? I'll gladly enter into one through PM providing it doesn't get personal.

I don't think it's really a disgrace at all. It sounds to be a bit of an over-reaction. Let's get this into perspective. They married. They divorced. She died. He remarried. It happens every day.

tiaraprin 10-28-2005 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
I don't see that it did rock the British Monarch but if it did then it rocked the BRITISH monarch - not the American. Charles and Camilla certainly do not need the approval of the yanks - they have the British seal of approval from everyone who matters and that is all that matters.

Divorce isn't a huge issue. Anne, Andrew, Charles, Henry VIII - they've all divorced and the Monarchy's still here isn't it? And to suggest that Charles should have stayed manicled to Diana even though he was unhappy is as impractical as it is cruel.

Diana did have a chance to live her life but is this the topic for a Diana/Charles/Camilla argument? I'll gladly enter into one through PM providing it doesn't get personal.

I don't think it's really a disgrace at all. It sounds to be a bit of an over-reaction. Let's get this into perspective. They married. They divorced. She died. He remarried. It happens every day.

If Princess Margaret hadn't divorced in 1978, we would not have seen the divorces Her Majesty's children today.

It wasn't as trivial as you believe when Anne and Andrew divorced. The foundations of the Monarchy were shaking in 1991-1992. Anne and her husband were both having affairs. Andrew couldn't stop the courtiers from constantly bashing Sarah until she completely lost it. Charles and Diana were beyond hope. Then Sarah became the scapegoat for all of the monarchy's difficulties instead of equalizing the blame on to all who were responsible. While Sarah did wrong, she was not the only one. The courtiers should also take their fair share of the blame in playing God amongst the royals deciding who they like and don't like.


Constantly the fact that I am a "Yank" and not a "Brit" is bandied about. I may not be British, but I can see what is going on. Also contrary to what is being reported here, not all Brits accept Charles and Camilla. Most actually are apathetic which is even worse than hatred. If the British become apathetic to its monarchy, then it will not survive.

BeatrixFan 10-28-2005 04:31 PM

Re:
 
So? 1 in 3 marriages now breaks down. The Queen had four children and 3 ended in divorce. It's no big issue it really isn't. They got divorced and 2 of them got remarried to the people they were having affairs with. Is that so wrong? It's the people who have this fairytale expectation of Royalty that consider it to be the fall of the House of Windsor. Those who live in the real world see it slightly different.

tiaraprin 10-28-2005 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
So? 1 in 3 marriages now breaks down. The Queen had four children and 3 ended in divorce. It's no big issue it really isn't. They got divorced and 2 of them got remarried to the people they were having affairs with. Is that so wrong? It's the people who have this fairytale expectation of Royalty that consider it to be the fall of the House of Windsor. Those who live in the real world see it slightly different.

It still does not make it right and that is the fact that gets lost here. As we say here in my country, "Two wrongs don't make a right."

BeatrixFan 10-28-2005 04:36 PM

Re:
 
Quote:

It still does not make it right and that is the fact that gets lost here. As we say here in my country, "Two wrongs don't make a right."
We have that saying here but we tend to go on personal feelings rather than old wives sayings. This has become way off topic so we better get back to Charles and Camilla's visit which I'm sure (providing the nut-brigade stay at home) will go extremely well.

Elspeth 10-28-2005 04:44 PM

I think it remains to be seen how they're received here; speculation won't really matter in the face of facts. These days the USA is in one of its more religion-minded phases, although the religion-based morality that gets so hot under the collar about homosexuality and abortion tends to be somewhat more relaxed about divorce, so we'll just have to see what the reaction is like.

Ennyllorac 10-28-2005 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth
I think it remains to be seen how they're received here; speculation won't really matter in the face of facts. These days the USA is in one of its more religion-minded phases, although the religion-based morality that gets so hot under the collar about homosexuality and abortion tends to be somewhat more relaxed about divorce, so we'll just have to see what the reaction is like.

I agree with you Elspeth. I don't think there will be any demonstrations against the royal visit. There won't be the same hysteria as when Diana visited. I think it will be just a normal state visit that will get it's 30 second new blurb and that's it.

ysbel 10-28-2005 05:35 PM

Thanks Elspeth for keeping the discussion on topic.

Since we were discussing general American attitudes toward the other woman who marries the husband, I still maintain that most Americans don't care in general and I believe this opinion is justified if you look at the reactions to other high profile marriages where the guy left the wife and married the mistress.

There's not a lot of moral indignation at these other marriages which speaks volumes on what Americans really think of the matter.

ysbel 10-28-2005 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth
although the religion-based morality that gets so hot under the collar about homosexuality and abortion tends to be somewhat more relaxed about divorce, so we'll just have to see what the reaction is like.

I agree, Elspeth. The reaction has been interesting so far. The attitude seems to be that people want to get a look at his new wife and see for themselves. There's quite a bit of curiosity; I think the real reaction will come as a result of how Charles and Camilla conduct themselves on the tour but that we won't know until they get here.

seto 10-28-2005 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel
I agree, Elspeth. The reaction has been interesting so far. The attitude seems to be that people want to get a look at his new wife and see for themselves. There's quite a bit of curiosity; I think the real reaction will come as a result of how Charles and Camilla conduct themselves on the tour but that we won't know until they get here.


I agree it is nobodys business but the partys involved it is a private matter.

Lady Marmalade 10-28-2005 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel
I would have to respectfully disagree, Lady Marmalade. While at family gatherings, Americans would be show some distaste and distance; for purely political or social gatherings, the other woman who married the man is not necessarily shunned in this country.

When Donald Trump ran off with Marla Maples, it was scandalous at first but they were received well pretty much anywhere they went afterwards. The only cases I know of where a married partner was shunned by society was during the breakup of Loni Anderson and Burt Reynolds and then the breakup between Mia Farrow and Woody Allen. But these men allegedly did a lost worse than the charges levied against Charles and Camilla. Burt was rumoured to have been physically violent with Loni and Woody ran off with his 17 year old foster daughter.

These are entirely more serious circumstances.

And of course I am happy you have an opposing viewpoint, as I respect your opinions as well, ysbel. :)

But, it is still not viewed as being 100% respectable in this case.

There is a vast difference between...celebrities, such as the ones you mentioned...of whom I have high disdain for, and the future sovereign and head of a monarchy and religion.

I am happy he is happy. But, I still see it as socially...how can I phrase it..distasteful.

Oh well, I do hope things go smoothly for them when they are here and our journalists, if given the chance of asking questions, have done their homework properly.

Lady Marmalade 10-28-2005 09:51 PM

From what I have read in past postings on hear today...then why even have these forums? Obviously people do care.

And while yes divorce rates are high, IN GREAT BRITAIN TOO, BEATRIXFAN, we are not as forgiving in this country....we do however let things evaporate and become part of the past...but the stench is still there to smell as the damage has been done.

It does not make sense for any of us to post then if people do not care...as that is what I am reading...

With that said....we shall see how everything plays out next week...

If what happened ever happened to my parents and myself in exactly the same way....my father would be cut off and never spoken to again..I don't care how happy he would have been, there would be nothing left for him in my life.

Alicky 10-28-2005 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
I am happy he is happy. But, I still see it as socially...how can I phrase it..distasteful.

Amazing how far we have come when it becomes so common and acceptable...makes one wonder about morals, folkways, etc....

It was the same social rules, taboos and constraints that kept him from his true happiness in the first place to me. I don't feel that he should have to yield to other people's ideals of propriety, especially when those people are complete strangers to him and the entire situation. How can I judge him morally if I don't know what even happened?

Alicky 10-28-2005 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
we are not as forgiving in this country....

That's a big generalization, but even if it wasn't, well then that's our problem not his.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
With that said....we shall see how everything plays out next week....

I don't understand why you are predicting doom. What is the worst that could happen anyway? War of the Waleses-related I mean, which I assume is what you mean.

Princejohnny25 10-28-2005 11:35 PM

The Bushes and Walses dont get along to well. They dont have the same views. I think Camilla is a wonderfull lady. Everybody wants happiness, even you all. But for them it is much harder to get.

polop 10-28-2005 11:42 PM

Maybe I missed something, but can you tell me why the Bushes aren't very fond of Camilla?:confused: ;)

Princejohnny25 10-28-2005 11:46 PM

Its not Camilla specifically but the Wales couple as a whole. Heck, most of the windsors. Charles and George are on completely different sides of the scale when it comes to there views. They dont get along. The bushes have no reason to hate camilla though. They have never met her or know her.

sara1981 10-29-2005 12:30 AM

i cant wait see Prince Charles he really my admire since i met him at Prince's trust and i cant wait see Camilla's new outfits also.

Sara Boyce

Harry's polo shirt 10-29-2005 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Princejonnhy25
Its not Camilla specifically but the Wales couple as a whole. Heck, most of the windsors. Charles and George are on completely different sides of the scale when it comes to there views. They dont get along. The bushes have no reason to hate camilla though. They have never met her or know her.

I don't think the Bush's hate Camilla, they just don't agree with their views.

I think Lady Marmalades worries are about how the american public will respond to their visit. Things are not very steady in here in the US, hopefully there aren't many protests...I remember when the announcement about Charles and Camilla's engagement, the Brits seemed excited about it and talked about their "love story"---in the US we all looked at each other like WHAT!!

tiaraprin 10-29-2005 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
From what I have read in past postings on hear today...then why even have these forums? Obviously people do care.

And while yes divorce rates are high, IN GREAT BRITAIN TOO, BEATRIXFAN, we are not as forgiving in this country....we do however let things evaporate and become part of the past...but the stench is still there to smell as the damage has been done.

It does not make sense for any of us to post then if people do not care...as that is what I am reading...

With that said....we shall see how everything plays out next week...

If what happened ever happened to my parents and myself in exactly the same way....my father would be cut off and never spoken to again..I don't care how happy he would have been, there would be nothing left for him in my life.

Exactly Lady Marmalade. However, we are in the minority. We are too "old fashioned" on this issue.

Alicky 10-29-2005 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry's polo shirt
Things are not very steady in here in the US, hopefully there aren't many protests...I remember when the announcement about Charles and Camilla's engagement, the Brits seemed excited about it and talked about their "love story"---in the US we all looked at each other like WHAT!!

I haven't noticed this unsteadiness over C&C here. I honestly haven't noticed anyone noticing in general either lol. What I have noticed here is that the coverage of them in the last couple years has been very welcoming, accepting and open-minded. I wouldn't say that "we all" in the US were shocked in horror, no one I knew was.

Alicky 10-29-2005 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry's polo shirt
I don't think the Bush's hate Camilla, they just don't agree with their views.

So long as there's no public debates things should run pretty smoothly. ;)

ysbel 10-29-2005 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
And of course I am you have an opposing viewpoint, as I respect your opinions as well, ysbel. :)

But, it is still not viewed as being 100% respectable in this case.

There is a vast difference between...celebrities, such as the ones you mentioned...of whom I have high disdain for, and the future sovereign and head of a monarchy and religion.

Thanks Lady Marmalade. I've often admired your reasoned and well thought out posts.

Of course, I was not trying to speak for yourself or tiaraprin and I definitely was not saying that 100% of Americans would find it acceptable. I was simply referring to the majority views. In a nation where Joey Buttofuoco can get a talk show because there's enough people who want to hear what he has to say, I'd say attitudes towards affairs are pretty relaxed. I was shocked by that as I was disgusted by the Woody Allen affair so I'm used to being in the minority opinion over here. It was quite surprising to find myself in the majority concerning Charles and Camilla.

You make a good point about the difference between a sovereign and a celebrity. I think if the United States had had a monarchy and a Royal Family, general attitudes probably would be different. We'd be wondering whether the morales of the British royals would surface over here. But we don't have a royal family so the foreign royals are for most Americans indistinguishable from other celebrities.

Warren 10-29-2005 08:49 AM

Well, "Middle America" is one thing, but I would expect the Royal Couple to receive a warm welcome in San Francisco!

The United States covers a huge land mass with a very large population; there are going to be different attitudes to what some members see as "moral issues" in different parts of the nation. For some, the "moral" arguments surrounding the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall are all-consuming; for other Americans it would be a non-issue. And no doubt this applies in every other country where people have an opinion and are allowed to express it.

That being said, it has always grated on many of us whenever anyone tries to export "Middle America" morals and values to other parts of the world where they may not be so welcome. We can deal with the export of American popular culture, economic theory, wealth, ideal of democracy, and to a lesser degree power, but we baulk at the attempted imposition of "American morals" on our own institutions and public figures.

Squidgy 10-29-2005 09:22 AM

{response to off-topic post deleted - Elspeth}

Personally, I don't think this visit will register much on the radar of the average American, so I don't think it is worth getting too upset about. I could be wrong, but I don't think there is a huge American interest in C&C. Besides, the Americans have other more important things on their minds right now (hurricanes, wars). This will just be another average royal visit, nothing more, nothing less.

Princejohnny25 10-29-2005 10:22 AM

Yes but this might be a small chance to escape all the troulbe. Do you think Charles and Camilla will pay thier respects to Rosa Parks. I know she lies in state at the Rotunda until Monday morining I think. So I guess they might have time. Then she travels to the Charles Wright Museum in Detroit where she will lie in state for 3 days. I live in detroit and it was a really sad day when she died. I am making plans to pay my respects and maybe watch the funeral courtage.

Squidgy 10-29-2005 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Princejonnhy25
Yes but this might be a small chance to escape all the troulbe. Do you think Charles and Camilla will pay thier respects to Rosa Parks. I know she lies in state at the Rotunda until Monday morining I think. So I guess they might have time. Then she travels to the Charles Wright Museum in Detroit where she will lie in state for 3 days. I live in detroit and it was a really sad day when she died. I am making plans to pay my respects and maybe watch the funeral courtage.

I don't know anything about C&C's schedule in the USA, so I can't say if they will pay tribute to Ms. Parks in any way. However, even knowing what little I do about this amazing woman, I think it would mean as much, maybe even more to her to have the common man (such as yourself) pay their respects to her. Yes, I agree it was a sad day when she died - I guess I was kind of hoping she would be with us forever. She was a dignified, courageous woman who will have her own chapter in American history.

Lady Marmalade 10-29-2005 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alicky
That's a big generalization, but even if it wasn't, well then that's our problem not his.


I don't understand why you are predicting doom. What is the worst that could happen anyway? War of the Waleses-related I mean, which I assume is what you mean.

I am not predicting doom..please...

I am just curious like a lot of people to see how everything goes, that's all. ;)

Lady Marmalade 10-29-2005 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel
Thanks Lady Marmalade. I've often admired your reasoned and well thought out posts.

Of course, I was not trying to speak for yourself or tiaraprin and I definitely was not saying that 100% of Americans would find it acceptable. I was simply referring to the majority views. In a nation where Joey Buttofuoco can get a talk show because there's enough people who want to hear what he has to say, I'd say attitudes towards affairs are pretty relaxed. I was shocked by that as I was disgusted by the Woody Allen affair so I'm used to being in the minority opinion over here. It was quite surprising to find myself in the majority concerning Charles and Camilla.

You make a good point about the difference between a sovereign and a celebrity. I think if the United States had had a monarchy and a Royal Family, general attitudes probably would be different. We'd be wondering whether the morales of the British royals would surface over here. But we don't have a royal family so the foreign royals are for most Americans indistinguishable from other celebrities.

Hi ysbel,

Thank you for making me smile today. I like reading your posts as you do balance mine very well.

I would like to make something clear though. While I may not like what happened or truly understand it, I am happy he is happy. It does look like a calm steady movement is setting in on their part to keep the House of Windsor moving forward.

I do agree with many others, I wish he had the chance to marry Camilla 35 years ago, none of these tragedies, ON ALL SIDES, would have happened and he would have been happy from the start.

So, I am caught in the middle with my thoughts....I know.....;)

Alicky 10-29-2005 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squidgy
This will just be another average royal visit, nothing more, nothing less.

I agree, and I don't feel that it's been built up into anything more. Who is building it up into this "extraordinary public relations campaign?" I haven't noticed C&C doing this, only C&C detractors.

Alicky 10-29-2005 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
I am not predicting doom..please...

Just hoping? :(

Elspeth 10-29-2005 03:30 PM

Probably not even hoping. This seems to be an unprofitable direction for this thread to be going.

Panther2000 10-29-2005 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
I am one of those "Middle Americans"
By the way...we are not Middle America...incorrect term for us. :)

As an american I too the term middle America silly. Even when we Silly Americans use it.

Lady Marmalade 10-29-2005 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alicky
Just hoping? :(

Nope, not at all. We have enough problems in the world. HRH is coming here, from what I gather, to focus on a few areas he is noted for, conservation, organic farming and so on. It is supposed to be very educational in terms of their trip and I hope things go very well.

Besides, we left the glamour back in the 80's...the era of Dynasty and Dallas and over the top glitz are over with. Which is good because if they met J.R. Ewing, I am sure he would hit on the Duchess. ;)

This is just a visit to test the waters and meant to be one of friendship and mutual interest.

Harry's polo shirt 10-30-2005 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
Nope, not at all. We have enough problems in the world. HRH is coming here, from what I gather, to focus on a few areas he is noted for, conservation, organic farming and so on. It is supposed to be very educational in terms of their trip and I hope things go very well.

Besides, we left the glamour back in the 80's...the era of Dynasty and Dallas and over the top glitz are over with. Which is good because if they met J.R. Ewing, I am sure he would hit on the Duchess. ;)

This is just a visit to test the waters and meant to be one of friendship and mutual interest.

I am glad I missed that previous conversation...I was getting boiling angry just reading it...Then your J.R comment made me laugh and took some anger out.:D

They will probably do alot of environment issues. That has always been Prince Charles safe area. It's about the only major issue he can publicaly take a side on without causing alot of trouble.

mandyy 10-30-2005 03:37 AM

1 Attachment(s)
#1: Britain's Prince Charles (R) and his new bride Camilla (L) arrive in the United States on their first official trip overseas since their wedding in April(AFP/File/Barry Batchelor)

xicamaluca 10-30-2005 09:20 AM

Charles and Camilla embark on first official trip abroad since wedding

WASHINGTON, (AFP) - Britain's Prince Charles and his new bride Camilla arrive in the United States on their first official trip overseas since their wedding in April.
The eight-day visit to New York, Washington and San Francisco will include a wreath-laying ceremony at the site of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, a meeting with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, lunch and dinner at the White House and several receptions, as well as meetings with business leaders and organic farmers.

Royal watchers said the eight-day tour will mark an opportunity for the heir to the British throne to test public sentiment toward Camilla in a country where his ex-wife, the late Princess Diana, remains hugely popular.
(...)
https://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051030/wl_uk_afp/usbritainroyals_051030042247;_ylt=Ar8LtAgD4.LT.Vutpibv1_EZO7gF;_ylu=X3oDMTA5bGVna3NhBHNlYwNzc3JlbA--

xicamaluca 10-30-2005 09:23 AM

https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...ed=rss.bayarea

Prince Charles and the duchess to be in Bay Area



Britain's Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, will visit a Berkeley middle school, a Point Reyes farmers' market and a Tenderloin hotel during their four-day visit to the Bay Area next month.

Charles' visit is part of an eight-day U.S. trip beginning Tuesday in New York and followed by a stop in Washington, D.C., for dinner with President Bush.
(...)

Princejohnny25 10-30-2005 10:14 AM

I love Camilla in that photo. She is so feminine and chic. But, I swear that is a old photo. I remember seeing it a while back. I love her hair and make up like that. Here are some american articles on the trip.

https://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/world/3424544

https://www.time.com/time/europe/maga...124239,00.html

wymanda 10-30-2005 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mandyy
#1: Britain's Prince Charles (R) and his new bride Camilla (L) arrive in the United States on their first official trip overseas since their wedding in April(AFP/File/Barry Batchelor)

I love this suit! It's so chic and the pastel colour really suits 'Milla's fair complexion. I'm so pleased that she chose to wear it again.

ysbel 10-30-2005 11:19 AM

Hmm, they will be in New York on Tuesday to lay a wreath at the WTC site. That's probably at the commemoration platform. Its open to the weather so I don't think they'll spend a great deal of time there. They'll probably spend more time at the British Memorial Gardens. Wonder where that is?

xicamaluca 10-30-2005 11:52 AM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

Camilla takes 50 dresses and 40 staff on tour

When She strides on to the world stage next week on her first state visit as the wife of the future King, the Duchess of Cornwall will naturally want to look her best.

So, in the most regal of traditions, she is taking 50 dresses and 40 staff on her eight-day tour of America, with everything, bar the outfits, paid for by the Foreign Office - which is funded by the taxpayer. When she takes her seat for dinner at the White House, the visit's most important engagement, all eyes will be on the woman who last week established her status as Queen in waiting when she stepped out in a diamond tiara personally loaned by the Queen.


In a break with protocol, Charles and Camilla have been invited to take both lunch and dinner with President Bush and his wife and Camilla knows it is her chance to wow Washington's elite. She has not yet decided which frock she will wear for the state banquet, but she has narrowed the choice down to three, and has her eye on a stunning pearl-studded, ivory evening gown from her favourite designers, Antonia Robinson and Anna Valentine, who created her wedding dress. (...)

Elspeth 10-30-2005 12:21 PM

Oh, my - apparently the Daily Mail reporter somehow can read Camilla's mind. Handy trick if you can do it.

susan alicia 10-30-2005 01:25 PM

Prince Charles to plead Islam's cause to Bush
 
according to the front page of the sunday telegraph of today:

(it is not on his official schedule but the seminar which charles has agreed to attend at georgetown university is about religion)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html

Harry's polo shirt 10-30-2005 01:52 PM

he seems really interested in religous peace lately. I think the title Prince Charles to plead Islam's cause to Bush is completely wrong. President Bush has many times said no blame on Islam-it is extremests who do not practice the religion of Islam. Islam is of peace..everyone knows that.

Lady Marmalade 10-30-2005 03:03 PM

I think HRH is smart enough not to go there and discuss religion with our President. I think he will do what his program says, focus on the educational and conservation issues he holds in high regard.

ysbel 10-30-2005 03:45 PM

Well if the Birmingham News is any indicator, there's hardly an uproar at all. Birmingham is right in the middle of the Bible Belt so if you'd expect a strong negative reaction you'd expect it here.

I was suprised that the paper even carried the story. The Prince and Duchess aren't going anywhere near Alabama.

https://www.al.com/news/birminghamnew...781.xml&coll=2

I think this visit is getting more attention than a regular royal visit but not as much (ofcourse) as when Charles and Diana came.

Lady Marmalade 10-30-2005 09:28 PM

Just watched the interview on 60 Minutes. I think he did an excellent job of presenting himself. You can see how much his heart and passion are in conservation and the environment. I was impressed by the town of Poundbury as well.

Lady Jean 10-30-2005 10:18 PM

The 60 Minutes interview was good, but I'm just glad there is something about their tour on US tv. Poundbury indeed looks lovely and I feel Prince Charles really does try to make a difference with his life. I always cringe w/these reporters though...he asked Charles about "your mother" (ahem, it's Your Majesty) and he (Steve Croft) said in the intro that you don't hear the royals speak that much (that just sounded stupid as well as being incorrect.)

Capt. Snowbear 10-30-2005 10:49 PM

Steve Croft, whom I am not very familiar with as I don't watch "60 Minutes", must have been thinking it was an informal interview. I don't think any interview with Prince Charles would be informally taken as the first interview before Charles comes here to the U.S., however the reporters in the U.S. vary in their opinions, so I am not to discount the idea that he feels that he is closer to Charles than anyone at that interview, when in fact he is fooling himself. You are correct, Lady Jean, he did not ask that question correctly, but rather, presumptively, posed the question as an interrogatory and investigative miscue. He should have corrected himself.

sara1981 10-31-2005 12:23 AM

Camilla takes 50 dresses and 40 staff on tour
https://www.royalarchive.com/index.ph...=1526&Itemid=2

Team Camilla prepare for their US tour
https://www.royalarchive.com/index.ph...=1515&Itemid=2

Against all the odds, this trip into 'Dianaland' should be a triumph for Camilla
https://www.royalarchive.com/index.ph...=1514&Itemid=2

Dennism 10-31-2005 12:51 AM

I liked the interview tonight. As always I find myself agreeing with the Prince on many things; the importance of ecumenicalism in world politics, bringing back the "humanity" to these times of great technological advances, and his views on architecture. I just wish this side of him was more respected in Great Britain and in the wider world. There was a good article written by him in this month's Conde Nast Traveler(British edition) about the importance of maintaining a balanced ecosystem alongside an area where tourism is an important part of the economy. He wrote mostly about area affected by the Boxing Day Tsunami. Well, I count myself as an American who will be curious and non-critical(that whole glass houses idea) about the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall coming to the US. I do, however, take great offense at the idea that simply because I live(born and raised) within 50 or even 500 miles as some idiots say, of an ocean, that I do not reflect the views of Middle American(read: a "real" America supposedly inhabitated by morally superior people). That gets my goat. Well, on a lighter note, to me and my family, Charles has always been called "Chucky" and I "chuckled" tonight when they mentioned Camilla as his bride and I immediately thought of "The Bride of Chucky". Hmm.

Dennism 10-31-2005 12:53 AM

I find the cancellation of the visit of the Duke and Duchess to New Orleans unfortunate. The President has since visited the area several times and I don't think it would reflect on him poorly had they visited the area.

susan alicia 10-31-2005 06:30 AM

Prince Charles: Climate change is 'terrifying'
 
....The prince is a keen environmentalist, but his office declined to say whether Charles will raise the issue of climate change when he dines with President Bush at the White House this week. Clarence House, the prince's office, said it would not be appropriate to comment on a private dinner.......


https://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/eu....ap/index.html

Skydragon 10-31-2005 07:07 AM

I would like to give a big thank you, :rolleyes: to an american woman called Lisa Stewart, 35 from Louisiana, who because she has been on the tv, representing the American section of the fanatical diana circle, has raised Camilla's support here in the UK.

She said that the fact that they support a woman who has been dead for 8 years, does not make them nutters. That most have a room 'dedicated' with pictures, dolls, spoons, plates, etc of her, also does not mean they are mentally challenged. I just wonder if they are all ex wives or children of ex wives?

I hope that most Americans, will warmly welcome Prince Charles and Princess Camilla.:)

BeatrixFan 10-31-2005 07:14 AM

Re;
 
Quote:

She said that the fact that they support a woman who has been dead for 8 years, does not make them nutters. That most have a room 'dedicated' with pictures, dolls, spoons, plates, etc of her, also does not mean they are mentally challenged.
Most people have a panic room. I would hope people don't have these shrines to Diana - my question would be.....why? I have a photograph of the Queen on my sitting room wall and I have had one in my bedroom since I was born. I've got a signed portrait of Princess Alexandra of Kent and recently, I popped in a photograph of Charles and Camilla in their State Banquet outfits. But I haven't filled the place with Royal bric a brac. I don't see any problems with the odd photograph or tasteful china but a room full of dedicated spoons?

susan alicia 10-31-2005 11:43 AM

Prince to visit US hurricane city
 
Dennism, they are going to New Orleans:) :

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4393636.stm





Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennism
I find the cancellation of the visit of the Duke and Duchess to New Orleans unfortunate. The President has since visited the area several times and I don't think it would reflect on him poorly had they visited the area.


ysbel 10-31-2005 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennism
Well, on a lighter note, to me and my family, Charles has always been called "Chucky" and I "chuckled" tonight when they mentioned Camilla as his bride and I immediately thought of "The Bride of Chucky". Hmm.

That's funny Dennism. :D

I'm glad they're going to New Orleans. It makes the trip more relevant.

Dennism 10-31-2005 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by susan alicia
Dennism, they are going to New Orleans:) :

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4393636.stm

O, there´s an article. I just saw that in the ticker at the top of the main news page and it didn't go anywhere. Yes, O, well. Okay. Then that's good. More relevant too. I like it. Bravo to them. Besides, they are supposed to be beyond politics. And the idea that visiting NO would make Bush look bad is purely a political idea.

susan alicia 10-31-2005 12:06 PM

of course :)



Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennism
O, there´s an article. I just saw that in the ticker at the top of the main news page and it didn't go anywhere. Yes, O, well. Okay. Then that's good. More relevant too. I like it. Bravo to them. Besides, they are supposed to be beyond politics. And the idea that visiting NO would make Bush look bad is purely a political idea.


sara1981 10-31-2005 12:30 PM

CAMI-££-A
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_obje...name_page.html

FROM NY OVER TO 'FRISCO
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_obje...name_page.html

ysbel 10-31-2005 12:41 PM

I noticed that Clarence House saw fit to rebut the outlandish statement that Camilla would be taking a 40 person entourage with her. Now the papers are claiming its 20 when its actually 16.

Elspeth 10-31-2005 01:31 PM

I thught that account of 40 people looked a bit bogus. She'd be guided on this first tour by what the royal family usually does, and the royal family usually doesn't take that many people along. Is this a symptom of the Mail's continuing partisanship of Diana, trying to cause problems for Camilla, perhaps?

ysbel 10-31-2005 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth
I thught that account of 40 people looked a bit bogus. She'd be guided on this first tour by what the royal family usually does, and the royal family usually doesn't take that many people along. Is this a symptom of the Mail's continuing partisanship of Diana, trying to cause problems for Camilla, perhaps?

I wouldn't doubt it Elspeth. What surprised me is the rebuttal from Clarence House. I guess they took it seriously enough to speak out.

Most probably Charles and Camilla are NOT coming to my building but will attend a ceremony at the platform constructed on the WTC site. I've been scouting the building for places to take pics but it looks pretty slim. I'll have to take a telephoto lens to get any good pics.

The weather should be nice though.

Lady Marmalade 10-31-2005 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel
I wouldn't doubt it Elspeth. What surprised me is the rebuttal from Clarence House. I guess they took it seriously enough to speak out.

Most probably Charles and Camilla are NOT coming to my building but will attend a ceremony at the platform constructed on the WTC site. I've been scouting the building for places to take pics but it looks pretty slim. I'll have to take a telephoto lens to get any good pics.

The weather should be nice though.

You are not going to pull a Spiderman act and leap from the buildings to get the pics are you? :)

I mean that in a teasing manner.

Elspeth 10-31-2005 02:49 PM

Well, ysbel, if the desire of the board regulars here to see some of your pics of Charles and Camilla isn't enough to make you rush out immediately and invest in whatever photographic equipment is necessary, I really do have to say that you don't appear to be taking your membership of this board anywhere near seriously enough.:D

ysbel 10-31-2005 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth
Well, ysbel, if the desire of the board regulars here to see some of your pics of Charles and Camilla isn't enough to make you rush out immediately and invest in whatever photographic equipment is necessary, I really do have to say that you don't appear to be taking your membership of this board anywhere near seriously enough.:D

LOL you two :D

I'll be taking my camera but my boss signed me up for a 2 day class starting tomorrow so if they don't do it during my lunch break I'm in trouble. :mad:

I did find the entrance to the platform at the World Trade Center. Now only to find out when they will be there. The lack of details here is maddening!

Dennism 11-01-2005 12:27 AM

Apparently, they want to jump on any possible bad news about the trip. Saving too much face, I think though. It sounded ridiculous. No need to comment on everything.

Elise27 11-01-2005 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennism
I liked the interview tonight. As always I find myself agreeing with the Prince on many things; the importance of ecumenicalism in world politics, bringing back the "humanity" to these times of great technological advances, and his views on architecture. I just wish this side of him was more respected in Great Britain and in the wider world. There was a good article written by him in this month's Conde Nast Traveler(British edition) about the importance of maintaining a balanced ecosystem alongside an area where tourism is an important part of the economy. He wrote mostly about area affected by the Boxing Day Tsunami. Well, I count myself as an American who will be curious and non-critical(that whole glass houses idea) about the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall coming to the US. I do, however, take great offense at the idea that simply because I live(born and raised) within 50 or even 500 miles as some idiots say, of an ocean, that I do not reflect the views of Middle American(read: a "real" America supposedly inhabitated by morally superior people). That gets my goat. Well, on a lighter note, to me and my family, Charles has always been called "Chucky" and I "chuckled" tonight when they mentioned Camilla as his bride and I immediately thought of "The Bride of Chucky". Hmm.

I strongly disagree charles to me seemed more of a pompous *** excuse my language. :) Not only that but he just seemed like this carefully constructed character who's extremely aloof. In any case it did not help that the reporter pointed out that he would not answer questions abt the queen, his sons, or his wife, and how everything about his image is carefully crafted. The one thing that the interview was successful in portraying was that he does a lot of work. but other than that it does not leave you sympathizing with prince charles at all, and does nothing to support the supposed goal of helping to give him and camilla a better reception in the US. He did not have to say anything personal but could have complemented camilla on how wonderfully well she has adjusted to her new role--which would really help improve the image of Camilla in the US. As far as not answering questions abt the queen ok so he could have refused to answer personal questions about his relationship with her,but could have spoken about how she has done an admirable job as queen.---all of this would have made him seem less detached, more human-without getting personal at all. When you look or read interviews that his sons have given they dont seem to have that pompousness, that aloofness, they seem like people you can sympathize with and could have a conversation with.

The last question he was asked was a total disaster-I dont really deem it that personal of a quuestion--It was something abt how he seemed happy and stable---what would have been wrong with a short yes. as opposed to his answer "if that's what you think". I didnt like the interview at all and can now understand better why so many people have that negative view of him.

ysbel 11-01-2005 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elise27
I strongly disagree charles to me seemed more of a pompous *** excuse my language. :) Not only that but he just seemed like this carefully constructed character who's extremely aloof.

I didn't get this impression at all. He didn't look like a man who was carrying an attitude. Charles is not one of my favorite public speakers. He mumbles a lot and rambles; that hardly makes him a carefully constructed character.

I'm also not a fan of public figures divulging personal things about their loved ones. I always wonder what the loved ones think. He could have said something innocuous like you suggested but I suspect Charles' emotions run very close to the surface and if that's the case, its better for him not to go there.

He did talk about the things that are important to him and while his delivery was not the best he came off to me at least as very sincere.

I will agree though that 60 minutes wasn't the most receptive forum to have the interview. You picked up on the fact that they advertised what questions he wouldn't answer which made him look worse. But all royal interviewers are given a list of questions that won't be answered and they generally don't publicize it. I'm sure Harry's people had a list of these questions when BBC did the interview with him but the BBC didn't see fit to publish what they were.

If you take a look at the interview Steve Croft had with another CBS commentator (on 60 minutes website), you'll really see how politely hostile they were. Steve couldn't get over the fact that Charles had never had to work for a living - well that was obvious before the interview started; you mean he didn't get anything more out of it than that? And the other reporter said that his attitude towards royalty was the same as the Founding Fathers - he didn't see any use for them.

It was a shame that Barbara Walters or someone like that couldn't do the interview. She wouldn't have been so turned off that he never had to work for a living and you may have seen Charles open up more.

Humera 11-01-2005 06:33 AM

What time exactly does TV coverage of Charles and Camilla's visit begin?
Im having to put up with CNN just so I dont miss anything. The host keeps saying "the royals are coming" as if charles and camilla were the only royals in the world. And then there's a stupid question they're asking everyone and Carol Costello keeps saying "what do the royals have to do to earn your love" because according to CNN polls nobody seems to care. I find that rather pompous.
This woman's just as bad as another CNN host who didnt know what the word princess-consort meant.
Screen caps of the poll:
https://img465.imageshack.us/img465/5028/3copy5fh.th.jpg https://img465.imageshack.us/img465/7...copy4fi.th.jpg

BeatrixFan 11-01-2005 07:23 AM

Re:
 
In Britain there is an unwritten law that concerns Tv Interviews. You're briefed on the questions before you go on and you answer each one with your rehearsed or planned answers. The same occurs with Radio. It's impolite to ask any other questions than the interviewee is prepared for.

I think alot of people think Charles is pompous because he speaks extremely well, holds himself well and doesn't share his secrets with the world. The Royal Family don't have alot of privacy and what they have, they're entitled to keep.

I find this sooo annoying. He does work for a living! He's a member of the Royal Family - thats a job in itself and its a difficult one. (More difficult than interviewing people on news channels)

The better option would have been for Charles to appear on Parkinson and for it to have been broadcast in America. Parkinson knows the boundaries and is generally easy to talk to. He's done some brilliant interviews with Princess Anne and Prince Andrew. I find American journalists tend to forget their place.

seto 11-01-2005 07:26 AM

It was the press that made this into a campaign for the u.s to like camilla. Nobody ever said it was true and they said he would not talk about anything else. I think his personal life is private and it should stay that way. He and Camilla should get on with their lives and their royal duties.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises