Royal Gossip

The British Royal Family *Windsor* => Prince Charles and Camilla => Topic started by: Alexandrine on August 22, 2011, 04:09:26 pm



Title: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on August 22, 2011, 04:09:26 pm
Who we gonna call? Quackbuster!

Quote
It began in 2005 when he rubbished a report, sponsored by the Prince, which supported the idea that the NHS would save up to £3.5 billion a year if it spent more on alternative therapies. “I knew the facts extremely well as I had done a similar report for the World Health Organisation, and didn’t mince my words.”

Sir Michael Peat, the Prince of Wales’s private secretary, complained that Prof Ernst had breached confidentiality by speaking to a newspaper. “There was a 13-month investigation and I was shown to be innocent, but all fund-raising stopped. After that, I was persona non grata.” This, he believes, led to the funding crisis that forced him into early retirement, aged 63.

“Both the vice-chancellor of Exeter University and the dean of the Peninsula Medical School were knighted.” For taking the Prince’s side? “Cause and effect are not proven.”

Last month, Prof Ernst told a conference in London that he considered the Prince “a snake-oil salesman” for supporting “unproven and disproved” remedies and for selling a £10 Duchy Herbals Detox Tincture. The range, he said, should be renamed “Dodgy Originals”.

The battle between the two men is one of principle, he says. “We urgently need to focus on the safety of alternative treatments, of which there are about 400.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/alternativemedicine/8711875/Who-we-gonna-call-Quackbuster.html

What the heck?!?! This is awful, I cannot believe this  :-X


Title: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on March 05, 2012, 12:10:13 pm
Please all that doesn't deserve a whole thread post it here.  :thankyou:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on March 14, 2012, 10:29:09 pm
Mark Stewart ‏ @RegalEyes    · Open
It was kisses all round as the Duchess of Cornwall bumped into ex husband Andrew Parker Bowles and the Princess Royal at Cheltenham Races

 :-X


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on March 15, 2012, 09:39:20 pm


    God Tom PB is ugly... so glad William and Harry had Diana for a mother.

                  Andrew PB looks like the "stuffed stoat" Camilla used to call him, actually so does their son.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Mooster on March 15, 2012, 10:15:39 pm
^ I try not to imagine what Camilla and Charles' sprogs would have looked like  :ick: We, as a nation, were at least spared that  :nervous:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 17, 2012, 04:40:19 am
I think that once Charles got married, Camilla should have backed off and worked on her own marriage; sleeping with someoen and then trying to be friends is impossible and I that if not for a lot of factors, things would have been different. Charles strikes me as utterly ignorant about a lot of things and I am more than sure that after he dumped her the first time in the nineties, his staff should have moved in and made things a lot more difficult.

I notice just now that each time a Windsor man breaks off a relationship and then gets back together, it ends up in marriage. All that had to be done was a little hardball and a lot of ruthlessness.

If Diana had wanted ot be really cruel, she could have remained the wife and ended up keeping Camilla in the mistress position, thus keeping up the possibility of winning her husband back in time. As she matured things got better between her and Charles and I think that things might have changed.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on March 31, 2012, 09:31:03 pm

   You do have a point Kuei Fei.

              :thumbsup:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on March 31, 2012, 11:05:32 pm
I think that once Charles got married, Camilla should have backed off and worked on her own marriage; sleeping with someoen and then trying to be friends is impossible and I that if not for a lot of factors, things would have been different. Charles strikes me as utterly ignorant about a lot of things and I am more than sure that after he dumped her the first time in the nineties, his staff should have moved in and made things a lot more difficult.

I notice just now that each time a Windsor man breaks off a relationship and then gets back together, it ends up in marriage. All that had to be done was a little hardball and a lot of ruthlessness.

If Diana had wanted ot be really cruel, she could have remained the wife and ended up keeping Camilla in the mistress position, thus keeping up the possibility of winning her husband back in time. As she matured things got better between her and Charles and I think that things might have changed.


 :thumbsup:
I agree, I feel like that too. 


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on April 04, 2012, 10:54:55 pm
I just don't understand why these Windsor men don't have the guts to call it off and keep it off; he had a wife that most men would KILL for, he had two healthy kids that any father would adore, but he blew it all, all for a woman who has brought him nothing but grief and problems and divisions. All because of his affair, he ended up losing his hard won reputation, he lost a lot of his dignity, and he lost his credibility, and a large amount of people don't want him to be king. I am sure that in time Diana would have ended up maturing and saving herself and I am sure that he would have been able to take a more proportional view of the situation they were in.

I sometimes wonder, that if he hadn't been so badly treated, if he might have turned out differently. Philip supposedly resented him because he viewed Charles as 'privileged' and felt that he had to 'toughen' Charles up (which apparently translated into verbally abusing him) and scarred him from life and in a lot of ways, left him without a father figure. then of course, watching his mother take a passive stance while Philip slept around, almost frenetically. I don't think Philip was a good influence on Charles and HM should have ended up taking a much more firm stance with either adultery or how Charles was treated as a kid. A lot of it has no excuse to let your kid be treated like that.

I wonder, if Charles had kept it called off, if William might have turned out differently. William might have had the guts to call it off with Kate and keep it off and then end up taking a firm stand with the press and public.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on July 05, 2012, 11:34:12 am
Prince of Wales's brother-in-law dreads the Olympics

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9370536/Prince-of-Waless-brother-in-law-dreads-the-Olympics.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on July 06, 2012, 07:01:11 pm
I love this pic of Charles http://thestwrd.com/post/24591397861 he is so much stylish than his sons


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: leogirl on July 06, 2012, 07:20:31 pm
I agree Charles knows how to dress himself nicely. Harry is pretty good, but William looks like a slob a lot of the time.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on July 06, 2012, 09:14:05 pm
I agree Chuck and Hazza know how to dress  :flirt: ...Willy that is another story  :-X.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on July 08, 2012, 02:55:41 pm
Off with their heads! Prince Charles wages war on orange blooms at Highgrove

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2170364/KATIE-NICHOLL-Off-heads-Prince-Charles-wages-war-orange-blooms-Highgrove.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on September 04, 2012, 09:09:59 pm
I didn't know this story

His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Royal_Highness_the_Prince_of_Wales_v_Associated_Newspapers_Ltd


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: True Brit on September 04, 2012, 09:22:49 pm
I do recall the "appalling old waxworks" story during the handover of "Honkers" and something vaguely tells me a servant leaked extracts from his dairy. I didn't know it was a court case.

Here's a copy of the High Court Judgement it seems PC is in the habit of keeping a journal of overseas visits and circulates them to a select list within the various palaces on his return. The crux of the story is here:

Quote
A Ms Sara Goodall was employed by the Household of the Claimant as a secretary to
the Deputy Private Secretary at St James’s Palace between 23 May 1988 and 21
December 2000. The Claimant contends she wrongly copied a number of the journals,
including the Hong Kong Journal, removed those copies from the Claimant’s private
office and gave copies of them, through an intermediary, to The Mail on Sunday.
Thereafter and, it is said, knowing of their confidential nature, The Mail on Sunday
published quotations and other material from the Hong Kong Journal and threatens to
make further use of the journals in future newspaper articles. In these circumstances
the Claimant contends that the Defendant has acted in breach of confidence and
infringed his copyright and threatens so to do.

http://www.5rb.com/docs/HRH%20Prince%20of%20Wales-v-Associated%20Newspapers%20Ltd%20ChD%2013%20Jan%202006.pdf


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on September 04, 2012, 09:27:11 pm
I've been searching jurisprudence about privacy and found a couple that were interesting like one about the Earl Spencer. As it is against the own press maybe it's the reason we don't get to know more about the cases.

I cannot believe that they decided to publish Charles' diary  ???


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: True Brit on September 04, 2012, 09:31:43 pm
I have to say I would think this to be a breach of confidence in this matter. Although PC's lobbying and consitutional role was a major part of the defence:

Quote
The Defendant resists the claim and intends to contest the application for summary
judgment. Through counsel it has said that it anticipates serving reasonably
substantial evidence dealing with a range of factual matters including the Claimant’s
constitutional role and functions, the Claimant’s history of private lobbying of
democratically elected persons on topics of political importance, the Claimant’s
history of voluntary disclosure to the public of his views on a range of topics and the
Claimant’s boycotting of certain official dinners
.

I haven't seen the Earl Spencer stories. If you are looking for court cases there is an official web site that has them all - called Bailli - there is a search engine but it's vast so there may be some goodies in there we were unaware of.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on September 04, 2012, 09:35:00 pm
I was looking into the European Court Justice but as their search engine is so bad I was searching in google  :shy: I usually use westlaw but too much work for right now; I will try the Bailli website, strange that it's free.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Leila on September 04, 2012, 09:52:19 pm
They pubished parts of his private journals? They're that stupid?!    :-
It doesn't matter what lobbying PC does or that he's a public person, it's not like they were letters to MPs or something like that.
They might have got away with it after his death, but whie he's still alive? wtf 

This is the second time in a single day I'm defending them.  :o

I've been searching jurisprudence about privacy and found a couple that were interesting like one about the Earl Spencer. As it is against the own press maybe it's the reason we don't get to know more about the cases.
2000 was also before the internet really took off.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on September 05, 2012, 10:23:03 am
I remember when this happened, and then years later we have Prince Andrew's comments on foreign trips being disclosed via a British diplomat and Wikileaks.  I guess that before we had Wikileaks, we had secretaries and photocopiers.

It does sound like he was circulating his journals in a semi-professional capacity, ie he was playing the diplomat and trying to influence officials behind the scenes.  It's jolly difficult for any media outlet or anyone else in the UK to try and hold the RF to account.  I hope one day that will change (or they can give both Duchies back!).


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on September 05, 2012, 12:59:00 pm
Since the taxpayers pay for all these trips that Royals take I feel like anything associated with the trips belong to the taxpayers. That would include Journals, Diaries and any and all gifts.  :cookie:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on September 06, 2012, 09:00:19 am
^Gifts, indeed.  The proceeds from one of Camilla's Saudi necklaces could probably pay for at least one Middleton Mansion.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: lilariel on September 15, 2012, 12:39:17 pm
I know it is pretty early in NippleGate but was just thinking-has anyone heard anything even unofficial from like a good insider or twitter-in-the-know sort of source-of reaction from any Royal Fam Mem yet? Like any news hinted at what Pr Charles is doing with this or anyones whispered reaction besides "palace outraged"?

The only thing I remember reading somewhere is that the Duke and Duchess(read Wills) were the main "writers" of the released statement. Had the vibe that while it was confirmed as coming from the St James with the strong language and the "Diana card" woven literally into the released statement that the palace peeps seemed to want it known they hadn't drawn it up. Felt like someone trying to leak out that it might have still been worded strongly but quite differently(less emotional toned) if they had and wanted it known their hands weren't directly on it. I know Her Maj won't comment but just wondering if any "eyes" have seen and reported anything about what others might be thinking about it or acting accordingly to it-like even good V Linley? ???


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on September 16, 2012, 12:04:13 am
I haven't seen anything specific yet, but I'm sure in time we will.

I think it's interesting that when PH needed help it was very clear that papa was stepping in to 'protect' him, but when it's PW then he is the one who fronts it.  This makes PH seem like he's still a child, that he can't lead the official response to his own scandal, but PW can, because he's married so he's a 'real' adult now.  Of course it also makes Waity look like she is being treated as a child, because her Husband is defending her 'honour' (such as it is).

David Linley is probably embarrassed by it all, unless he was involved in it.  Something that is not widely known is that the Linleys are in fact filthy rich, largely due to lavish inheritances from both sides.  And where did Princess Margaret get her money from?  The taxpayer of course.



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexander on September 16, 2012, 01:11:56 am
Spice she was also very heavily subsidized by HM, and several rich friends. One of whom gave her the house in Mustique.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on September 16, 2012, 05:56:59 am
True, a lot of her money came from HM, but where did she get her money from?  I don't subscribe to the view that the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster are private money - they should be in public hands, like they were back in the middle ages.

Some of Margaret's estate was made up of the proceeds from the sale of possessions like the Poltimore Tiara, which I think was a gift from the Queen or the QM.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: True Brit on September 16, 2012, 11:10:59 am
I am of the opinion (supported by long reasearch) that all the money the royals have today is, one way or another, via the public.

There is a book from 1995 called Royal Fortune by a Profesor Phillip Hall who attempted to unravel the Royals income, taxes etc and had a hell of a job with documents being with-held or suddenly withdrawn from such as the British Library.

It's high time an updated book was published as much has changd since then.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on September 16, 2012, 04:52:47 pm
I thought Margaret didn't have too much money and at least her family had to sell a lot of things to pay for succession taxes. Was Snowdon rich?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on September 17, 2012, 08:22:25 pm
Camilla's humiliation

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-324169/Camillas-humiliation.html

a blast from the past but interesting nonetheless


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on September 17, 2012, 08:28:56 pm
I haven't seen anything specific yet, but I'm sure in time we will.

I think it's interesting that when PH needed help it was very clear that papa was stepping in to 'protect' him, but when it's PW then he is the one who fronts it.  This makes PH seem like he's still a child, that he can't lead the official response to his own scandal, but PW can, because he's married so he's a 'real' adult now.  Of course it also makes Waity look like she is being treated as a child, because her Husband is defending her 'honour' (such as it is).

David Linley is probably embarrassed by it all, unless he was involved in it.  Something that is not widely known is that the Linleys are in fact filthy rich, largely due to lavish inheritances from both sides.  And where did Princess Margaret get her money from?  The taxpayer of course.



..or maybe Pr. Charles doesn't want to defend Kate.
I think it speaks volumnes the only one defending her is William basically.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: True Brit on September 17, 2012, 10:31:38 pm
The whole "outrage" from the Palace is actually eerily quiet. I may have missed things but the usual barrage of support stories and Tweets - even from the Cambridges' own circle seems to be strangely quiet.

So far we've had Fergie and a pretend story about Sophie sending support which turned out to be a short comment from her ex business partner saying she perhaps has called her.

It's PW whose calling for people to be jailed I think and it was made very clear the strongly worded statement from SJP was from W&K - including the now highly derided "greed" comment which many commentators think is pretty rich coming from a) the RF and b) goldigging Waity


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on September 17, 2012, 11:02:19 pm
Perhaps Charles and the rest see William losing control and want to avoid any more escalation.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on September 18, 2012, 12:42:50 am
Maybe the palace is being quiet because they do not want to be asked why they were in France instead of the Paralympics in the first place.   bignono

I wish someone would start asking that question.  :laundry:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on September 18, 2012, 12:55:04 am
I think that question won't be answered until the RF gets the asnwer from WK.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on September 18, 2012, 01:09:04 am
Perhaps Charles and the rest see William losing control and want to avoid any more escalation.

Revenge is a dish best served cold. Remember when Kate said to the Jigsaw co-workers "it's his daddy's fault" we broke up, well now maybe Pr.Charles is just going to watch her twist in the wind and let William handle it and support her on his own. Afterall Charles gave her support during the Uncle Gary Skeevy-druggie scandal, maybe PrCharles is just not going to lift a finger for her, this time?

The Queen is sure silent. The Queen always came to Sophie's defense in scandal.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on September 18, 2012, 01:17:36 am
I am more than sure that Charles didn't defend her because she wasn't his daughter and I am sometimes weirded out that because she was an official girlfriend, that for some reason that automatically entitled her to the palace coming to her defense, or that the RF owed her something. As for blaming Charles, she's also been leveling accusations at Camilla and publicly implying that the two of them have some 'right' to the throne right after HM. I am sure Charles loves this, seeing Kate squirm.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on September 18, 2012, 08:27:56 am
I thought Margaret didn't have too much money and at least her family had to sell a lot of things to pay for succession taxes. Was Snowdon rich?

I don't really know.  I'm assuming the Linleys are filthy rich because they could afford to buy and restore this property in France, she runs a posh store in London selling products from the lavender farm, and they presumably own their house in Chelsea.  His furniture business is probably quite successful.  They did sell a lot of Margaret's things, no doubt to pay tax but also they may have taken some of the money from that for buying properties etc.  Serena's family are old money.  Snowdon was not rich when he came into the RF in 1960, but he has probably made a fortune since. 

The QM provided for her grandchildren in her Will, I am sure she left a large sum for Margaret too, which would have gone straight to her kids of course because she died 6 weeks before the QM.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on September 18, 2012, 08:41:25 am
Camilla's humiliation

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-324169/Camillas-humiliation.html

a blast from the past but interesting nonetheless

Def an interesting read, thanks for posting.  I had a wee laugh at this:
Quote
She and Charles will arrive at Chester Cathedral separately and travel in different cars to the reception at the Grosvenor family seat of Eaton Hall, where Harry disgraced himself five years ago by drinking excessively and vomiting over the Duke's antique carpets.




Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on September 18, 2012, 03:01:48 pm
I laughed with that sentence too. But sadly he hasn't seemed to change much


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: True Brit on September 18, 2012, 03:10:33 pm
Cannons to the right of us, cannons to the left of us. Onwards, onwards rode the six hundred into the valley of death they thundered.

With apologies to the Charge of the Light Brigade but it seems a few chickens are coming home to roost. This time in the shape of the Information Comissioner (again) who has ruled Charles' lobbying letters must be made public.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/18/prince-charles-letters-ministers-judges?CMP=twt_gu

(I'll add to C&C thread)


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Leila on September 18, 2012, 03:17:28 pm
What happens to 'normal' lobbying letters? Are they usually made public?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: True Brit on September 18, 2012, 03:25:24 pm
They should be able to under FOI anyone should be able to write to, say the Dept of Transport, and ask to see all correspondence and documents in relation to a new road or other project.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Leila on September 18, 2012, 03:25:54 pm
 :thankyou:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: True Brit on September 18, 2012, 03:29:55 pm
I mean look at this extract from the Guardian story...

Quote
The departments had argued that the correspondence between the prince and ministers had to be kept secret under a constitutional convention. Disclosure would undermine the convention which allowed the heir to the throne to be educated in the business of government to prepare him to become king, they claimed.

But the judges decided that permitting the prince's lobbying to be concealed under this convention was a "massive extension" of the convention, which was not justified. They decided that "it was fundamental" that the lobbying by the heir "cannot have constitutional status" and cannot be protected from disclosure.

And why do the Departments themselves want this keeping quiet? Because, one suspects, they've been caving in to PC's requests.

And this

Quote
The evidence, they said, "shows Prince Charles using his access to government ministers, and no doubt considering himself entitled to use that access, in order to set up and drive forward charities and promote views, but not as part of his preparation for kingship".

It is this lack of transparency that will do for the monarchy in the end. Covering up their costs; claiming estates are private when it suits; sneaking costs such as private planes onto various departments budgets.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on September 18, 2012, 09:42:48 pm
^Absolutely.  Elsewhere in government, transparency has become an essential part of doing business.  Government departments know it is counterproductive to try and hide things, it only makes them worse.  Honestly, the officials under the control of HM and PC are living in the dark ages, no doubt because they know they have to toe the line if they want to keep their jobs.

When C&C visit NZ in November, there will be critique of the cost of the trip (which will be largely paid for by the NZ taxpayer).  There have been huge budget cuts since 2008 and people are hurting.  I wouldn't be surprised if there are protests, placards and booing.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: dianab on September 25, 2012, 08:22:04 pm
I thought Margaret didn't have too much money and at least her family had to sell a lot of things to pay for succession taxes. Was Snowdon rich?

I don't really know.  I'm assuming the Linleys are filthy rich because they could afford to buy and restore this property in France, she runs a posh store in London selling products from the lavender farm, and they presumably own their house in Chelsea.  His furniture business is probably quite successful.  They did sell a lot of Margaret's things, no doubt to pay tax but also they may have taken some of the money from that for buying properties etc.  Serena's family are old money.  Snowdon was not rich when he came into the RF in 1960, but he has probably made a fortune since. 

The QM provided for her grandchildren in her Will, I am sure she left a large sum for Margaret too, which would have gone straight to her kids of course because she died 6 weeks before the QM.
I read Snowdon had a very good divorce settlement from the royals. I read the same about Mark Philips. I read Diana asked advice to them about the divorce they said to her focus on money...
I dont know about Snowdon but I imagined he was rich before the marriage... I dont know very much about him & Margaret, but Queen-Mother always strikes me as a snob, why she allowed the wedding?

For what I read the The Queen & The Queen-Mother always sided with him....


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: berlin on September 25, 2012, 10:15:05 pm
I'd love to know too.  I think I read on here or elsewhere that QM was jealous of Margaret's youth and beauty and that she was jealous that Peter Townsend was attracted to Margaret instead of her.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on September 25, 2012, 10:20:08 pm
 :o :ick: :o


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on September 26, 2012, 04:31:08 am
^^I think that by 1959, when PM was nearly 30, the QM was glad to see her married off at all.  Apparently PM got engaged to Snowdon as a kneejerk reaction to Townsend marrying someone else.  No doubt she was in love with Snowdon too - it was something of a whirlwind thing.  He was a bit like Sophie in terms of money/standing - a respectable upper middle class family but not aristocracy.  In addition to his divorce settlement, he made a lot of money as a photographer/designer over the years.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Mooster on October 06, 2012, 12:52:30 am
The Jimmy Savile rumours are gaining momentum...it looks as though there are going to be a lot of nasty stuff and maybe names coming out of the woodwork eventually.  I wonder if the police will be investigating Prince Charles close friendship with Savile, and what it consisted of?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on October 06, 2012, 02:15:18 am
^^I think that by 1959, when PM was nearly 30, the QM was glad to see her married off at all.  Apparently PM got engaged to Snowdon as a kneejerk reaction to Townsend marrying someone else.  No doubt she was in love with Snowdon too - it was something of a whirlwind thing.  He was a bit like Sophie in terms of money/standing - a respectable upper middle class family but not aristocracy.  In addition to his divorce settlement, he made a lot of money as a photographer/designer over the years.

Movie The Queen's Sister (clip The First Date)
w Snowdon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFaRT3CJSbk&feature=related


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on October 06, 2012, 02:26:45 am
^Thanks for posting, I enjoyed that!  I'm sure they were "in lust"... sadly it turned into an abusive relationship


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on October 06, 2012, 02:50:15 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCrbeJcSSds&feature=related
The Queen's Sister....Princess Margaret wooing Snowden in Nightclub with a song.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuXFHOv2eoM&feature=related
The Queen's Sister ...another clip
(married now fighting)


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on November 09, 2012, 06:14:17 pm
if anyone wants a good laugh try this http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/faqs



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on November 10, 2012, 04:06:29 am
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/357251/Camilla-s-a-knockout-say-troops-

Quote
AN Army line-up for the Duchess of Cornwall turned into a passing out parade in Sydney yesterday.

A military policeman collapsed during an inspection by Camilla, who had just been made Colonel-in-Chief of the Royal Australian Corps of Military Police.

The Duchess, who flies to New Zealand with Prince Charles today on the final leg of a two-week Diamond Jubilee tour, paid tribute to the unit’s professionalism.

“It seems to me you are never off duty – like my husband,” she said.

Why do they always force these guys to stand at attention in the heat just so a royal can eventually walk down the line and then leave? It makes no sense to me.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 10, 2012, 08:27:28 am
Quote
Why do they always force these guys to stand at attention in the heat just so a royal can eventually walk down the line and then leave?

You tell me; it's happened quite often really and it's obviously torturing the men who have to do it.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: benign on November 27, 2012, 09:27:14 pm
PC press secretary Haverson is leaving next year..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/27/prince-charles-pr-consultancy-google


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on December 14, 2012, 11:07:09 pm
christmas card


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: YooperModerator on December 15, 2012, 03:13:46 am
er hon I think there's a link missing  :tehe:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on December 15, 2012, 08:31:11 am
I like their Christmas Card!!!  :thumbsup:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on December 15, 2012, 02:32:31 pm
sorry  :shy:

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/Search/Search.aspx?EventId=158535241&EditorialProduct=Royalty


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on December 15, 2012, 03:38:53 pm
Well Charles did try to act as if it was his Jubilee year so of course he would use this photo for his Christmas card.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on January 16, 2013, 02:17:57 pm
There are photos of Camilla first wedding? I've never seen them.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Stephanie on January 16, 2013, 11:24:14 pm
http://cache1.asset-cache.net/gc/52180049-camilla-shand-and-major-andrew-parker-bowles-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=OCUJ5gVf7YdJQI2Xhkc2QDV6GNyjj4%2Fyg%2FHiRfYHkZNpkn9PB0bZTN1%2BGtHK3BwS
Here ya go, Alexandrine!


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: memyselfandroyals on January 16, 2013, 11:46:31 pm
i can't see ...


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on January 18, 2013, 10:13:46 pm
me either but I see that they are from getty so:

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/the-wedding-of-andrew-parker-bowles-and-camilla-shand-at-news-photo/3260826

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/camilla-shand-and-captain-andrew-parker-bowles-outside-the-news-photo/3337699

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/camilla-shand-and-captain-andrew-parker-bowles-on-the-steps-news-photo/3347042

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/camilla-shand-arrives-at-the-guards-chapel-for-her-wedding-news-photo/3416680

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/camilla-shand-and-major-andrew-parker-bowles-pose-with-news-photo/52180052

I still cannot see what women saw in Parker Bowles


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on January 19, 2013, 01:19:29 am
^ They were most likely looking for a social standing but for Camilla I believe it was because she truly loved him and still does.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Acornia on January 19, 2013, 02:15:13 am
The younger Camilla reminds me of an (uglier) Sienna Miller sometimes :-X


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on January 20, 2013, 12:18:08 am
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-middleton-baby-prince-charles-1545462
Quote
The sale comes just weeks after the Sunday Mirror revealed Duchess of Cambridge Kate Middleton’s family were selling “little prince and princess” products through their Party Pieces business.

The Middletons were accused of cashing in on the birth, expected in July.

Eco-friendly Charles has gone for wooden worms, pigs and mice between £10 and £25 and discounted pink baby shoes... perhaps a hint that he’s expecting the new third in line to the throne to be a girl.

In a message next to the boots, the website says: “The perfect gift and ­keepsake. Made from soft safe, breathable vegetable-dyed leather.”

Another Grandparent cashing in? I want to know how far along she is that they may know the sex of the child already.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: memyselfandroyals on January 31, 2013, 12:59:50 am
me either but I see that they are from getty so:

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/the-wedding-of-andrew-parker-bowles-and-camilla-shand-at-news-photo/3260826

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/camilla-shand-and-captain-andrew-parker-bowles-outside-the-news-photo/3337699

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/camilla-shand-and-captain-andrew-parker-bowles-on-the-steps-news-photo/3347042

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/camilla-shand-arrives-at-the-guards-chapel-for-her-wedding-news-photo/3416680

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/camilla-shand-and-major-andrew-parker-bowles-pose-with-news-photo/52180052

I still cannot see what women saw in Parker Bowles



Thanks!  :hi:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on January 31, 2013, 11:39:16 am
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/9835242/Prince-Charles-interested-by-abdication.html

Not sure whether to believe this or not.  If he did say it, how disgusting to allow it to find its way into the media.  The UK is not the Netherlands.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Cressida on January 31, 2013, 11:55:30 am
I think it is disgusting that he makes it so plain he is desperate to inherit the throne, when it means his mother would have to die. It's just cold and selfish.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on January 31, 2013, 12:27:41 pm
Quote
This man appears to interfere in government on a regular and undisclosed basis. The fact that the number of times he does so is kept secret is a major cause for concern.

Having failed the 11+, been allowed into Cambridge without the same level of educational qualifications as the rest and left without a degree, the question is:

What are his qualifications for lobbying government other than the identity of his mother?

The above was a comment taken from the article. Did he leave without a degree? From memory I did not think that his A levels were good enough for Cambridge.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on January 31, 2013, 01:52:08 pm
 :BS: The Daily Telegraph is getting worse than The Daily Fail now days and that is saying something...


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on January 31, 2013, 03:13:45 pm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/9835242/Prince-Charles-interested-by-abdication.html

Not sure whether to believe this or not.  If he did say it, how disgusting to allow it to find its way into the media.  The UK is not the Netherlands.

I can believe it Charles has been whining about wanting the throne for years.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on February 01, 2013, 05:37:13 am
Quote
This man appears to interfere in government on a regular and undisclosed basis. The fact that the number of times he does so is kept secret is a major cause for concern.

Having failed the 11+, been allowed into Cambridge without the same level of educational qualifications as the rest and left without a degree, the question is:

What are his qualifications for lobbying government other than the identity of his mother?

The above was a comment taken from the article. Did he leave without a degree? From memory I did not think that his A levels were good enough for Cambridge.

I've always taken the official bio as true, but maybe the writer has other information.  Charles doesn't really seem all that bright, when I think about it.  Here's what his website bio says:

Quote
The Prince, who had already passed six O Levels, also took A Levels and was awarded a grade B in history and a C in French, together with a distinction in an optional special history paper in July 1967.

The Prince went to Cambridge University in 1967 to read archaeology and anthropology at Trinity College. He changed to history for the second part of his degree, and in 1970 was awarded a 2:2 degree.

IMO a senior royal should be getting As and Bs and not C grades, especially in French because he would have been surrounded by French speakers his entire life (HM, PP and QEQM all spoke French... not as fluent as an advanced speaker but enough to help Charles get more than a C).  How can you get a C when you don't have to work part time, and you can afford the best tutors money can buy.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on February 01, 2013, 06:24:46 am
^

An ordinary person would have not been accepted to Cambridge with B's and C's. Most applicants have 4 A's or three A's and a B and still probably have to take an entrance test.

 


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on February 01, 2013, 07:21:17 am
Quote
IMO a senior royal should be getting As and Bs and not C grades, especially in French because he would have been surrounded by French speakers his entire life (HM, PP and QEQM all spoke French... not as fluent as an advanced speaker but enough to help Charles get more than a C).  How can you get a C when you don't have to work part time, and you can afford the best tutors money can buy.

Because he refused to man up and take control of his education; it's the same reason William apparently decided not to learn anything practical and useful towards his future role. It was just for the 'experience' and the 'fun' and the 'normalcy.' Not about being practical.

Such a shame since in the past monarchs and royals were often heavily educated.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on February 01, 2013, 07:55:14 am
^^Thanks for the local info, Freya.  In NZ the only limited entry programmes are for things like medicine and law.  Anyone can enrol in a liberal arts/humanities type programme that the royals seem to go for.

It's interesting because HM's cousin the Duke of Gloucester went to Cambridge and was quite an intellectual.  I think of Prince Philip as an intelligent person. Who knows what he might have achieved if he had gone to university.   HM is smart but not a towering intellect per se.  How did Charles end up so thick?  Maybe his personality issues and extracurricular activities were a distraction.  Hard to focus on the books when you can't get away from the mirror,  :tehe:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snork Maiden on February 01, 2013, 12:48:33 pm
Quote
IMO a senior royal should be getting As and Bs and not C grades, especially in French because he would have been surrounded by French speakers his entire life (HM, PP and QEQM all spoke French... not as fluent as an advanced speaker but enough to help Charles get more than a C).  How can you get a C when you don't have to work part time, and you can afford the best tutors money can buy.

Because he refused to man up and take control of his education; it's the same reason William apparently decided not to learn anything practical and useful towards his future role. It was just for the 'experience' and the 'fun' and the 'normalcy.' Not about being practical.

Such a shame since in the past monarchs and royals were often heavily educated.

Although we can moan about Charles's interference and unsuitability as a future monarch, he's got a far better grasp of the history and responsibilities of his position than Wills has. He has shown concern for the youth of the country (Princes Trust) and cares about the fabric of everyday life (interest in environmental issues, housing, architecture etc.). One difference between father and son is that Charlie has benefitted from several mentors - e.g. Mountbatten (Uncle Dickie), the Queen Mother (Cookie) and  Laurens Van der Post. All of these individuals have murky aspects to them and Diana even said Jimmy Savile was a sort of mentor to Charles  :nervous:  But, setting aside the disturbing ways in which Charles may have been influenced or moulded by these people, he undoubtedly gained a lot of guidance from them and was encouraged to think about his role. All Wills has got is his granny (who he seems to disrespect) and Carole or maybe Uncle Gary?!


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on February 01, 2013, 02:48:13 pm
I think Charles was taught how to act Princely the way they did centuries ago. I don't think he is a big intellectual but hires intellectuals to help where he is lacking.

I think he mostly passes on info that he is told about the environment etc. because he doesn't live his life in the way he preaches.

The Prince's Trust is a good idea and has done some good works but when you really look at it well it looks different then.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on February 11, 2013, 01:31:49 am
Richard Kay: Charles kicks up stink over fish shop ban

Saviour: Prince Charleshas stepped in to save family-run fishmonger's Walter Purkis and Sons which is facing closure after a complaint about the smell



Against a backdrop of Britain’s worst food crisis since mad cow disease, Prince Charles has stepped in to save a family-run fishmongers which specialises in traditional methods of smoking its own haddock and salmon.

Walter Purkis and Sons 133-year-old Victorian smokehouse survived a Luftwaffe bomb during the Blitz,  and has seen off competition from Sainsbury’s, Waitrose and Marks & Spencer.

But it is now threatened with closure by the local council following a single complaint about smell from  a member of the public.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2276726/Richard-Kay-Charles-kicks-stink-fish-shop-ban.html#axzz2KY9hPIBA



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on February 11, 2013, 02:10:35 pm
I think if you look into it Chuck makes his son look bad at least he is passionate about things like youth and the environment and seems to care about his people ...while Willy only cares about vacationing!!! And when he gets bored of that influenced by his good for nothing hanger on hangs with celebs and watches sport!!!


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on February 13, 2013, 12:23:22 pm
phil dampier ‏@phildampier
Quote
Charles and Camilla will tour Oman, Jordan and Qatar next month. Couple are high profile this year following Jubilee.

Another Jolly jaunt or are we supposed to believe these are commonwealth nations that need to see royalty.   :-


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 13, 2013, 03:00:16 pm
Cammie will be sure to get a lot of "bling" from these trips.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on February 15, 2013, 03:17:07 am
Tea for two as Camilla enjoys a cup of tea with Prince Charles

IT might not have been the most romantic setting, but Prince Charles and Camilla celebrated Valentine’s Day yesterday with a cuppa at the market.


With no butler or bone china to hand, Charles, 64, and his wife helped themselves to sugar with their £1 mugs of tea. “That’s what I like to see, someone doing a bit of work,” Maria Moruzzi – who will have been in the family business at London’s Borough Market for 50 years next year – told them.


http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/377799/Tea-for-two-as-Camilla-enjoys-a-cup-of-tea-with-Prince-Charles


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on February 15, 2013, 03:30:11 am
Cammie will be sure to get a lot of "bling" from these trips.

I think that's why they are going :tehe:.

Have they been to Saudi Arabia yet? Or do they still punish adulteresses?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on February 15, 2013, 03:37:24 am
Tea for two as Camilla enjoys a cup of tea with Prince Charles

IT might not have been the most romantic setting, but Prince Charles and Camilla celebrated Valentine’s Day yesterday with a cuppa at the market.


With no butler or bone china to hand, Charles, 64, and his wife helped themselves to sugar with their £1 mugs of tea. “That’s what I like to see, someone doing a bit of work,” Maria Moruzzi – who will have been in the family business at London’s Borough Market for 50 years next year – told them.


http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/377799/Tea-for-two-as-Camilla-enjoys-a-cup-of-tea-with-Prince-Charles

Charles is so in touch with the people he acts like a clown with children, he goes to a pub and he has tea with everyone else.   :laugh:  Did you see all the gifts they got?

I think that is why Charles says nothing about William & Kate because he thinks the worse they look the better he looks.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on February 15, 2013, 09:11:55 am
^
I think you have a point there. Charles has always wanted the public to accept Camilla and has spent a fortune on PR etc. This has not really done the trick but along comes Kate and the clingons and Camilla is started to look better by the minute. Charles had no need to spend all that money on PR.

(Having said that I will never warm to her but I can see how her image is improving in the light of Kate's behaviour.)


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 15, 2013, 07:06:07 pm
Camilla is who she is as far as I'm concerned. I have had the same dislike of her before and after Kate. I see William and Kate having their own flaws but it doesn't change my feelings about Camilla.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on February 15, 2013, 10:04:11 pm
Tea for two as Camilla enjoys a cup of tea with Prince Charles

IT might not have been the most romantic setting, but Prince Charles and Camilla celebrated Valentine’s Day yesterday with a cuppa at the market.


With no butler or bone china to hand, Charles, 64, and his wife helped themselves to sugar with their £1 mugs of tea. “That’s what I like to see, someone doing a bit of work,” Maria Moruzzi – who will have been in the family business at London’s Borough Market for 50 years next year – told them.


http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/377799/Tea-for-two-as-Camilla-enjoys-a-cup-of-tea-with-Prince-Charles

I went there this summer! Lovely place and the church next to it was beautiful.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 11, 2013, 02:52:32 am
Do you guys think that Carole might end up trying to make a move and take Charles from Camilla?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 11, 2013, 03:00:28 am
When you consider the women Charles is eating alive with his eyes I would say not a chance. If Charles is going to risk an affair it would not be with Carole IMO. One ugly woman in a lifetime should be enough and he has Camilla, one of the ugliest. They don't call her old horse face for nothing.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 11, 2013, 04:04:08 am
No; Charles doesn't think Camilla is ugly and it's not looks, it's the ability of Camilla to pamper Charles and make him feel important. I bet Charles is possibly eying an affair and Carole does look like a sharper, younger version of Camilla and being undesired by the rest of the world is possibly part of the attraction. Carole is not hot hot hot by our standards, but that isn't what Charles is looking for. I don't think Camilla is as desirable to Charles now that Camilla has refined herself and I don't think Camilla is tending to Charles as often as we might think. She still retires to Raymill and she is abdicating her position the same way Diana did over time.

Carole vs Camilla, Carole would win because Carole has so much more to gain through a marriage and teh press would LOVE the idea of Carole becoming Princess of Wales and then seeing Camilla tossed off would please the Diana fans.

Camilla is due some pretty vicious karma and I believe that she would end up being replaced if Carole were so inclined.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on March 11, 2013, 04:42:26 am
 Camilla would resort to poison before she let her win.  :cookie: :spy:

It was reported Camilla had a good laugh when she read that Carole had been to her old Manor home wanting to buy it.

Interesting that Carole was even looking at it?  ???


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 11, 2013, 01:04:06 pm
Charles is not going to have an affair with Carole.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 11, 2013, 02:11:22 pm
No; Charles doesn't think Camilla is ugly and it's not looks, it's the ability of Camilla to pamper Charles and make him feel important. I bet Charles is possibly eying an affair and Carole does look like a sharper, younger version of Camilla and being undesired by the rest of the world is possibly part of the attraction. Carole is not hot hot hot by our standards, but that isn't what Charles is looking for. I don't think Camilla is as desirable to Charles now that Camilla has refined herself and I don't think Camilla is tending to Charles as often as we might think. She still retires to Raymill and she is abdicating her position the same way Diana did over time.

Carole vs Camilla, Carole would win because Carole has so much more to gain through a marriage and teh press would LOVE the idea of Carole becoming Princess of Wales and then seeing Camilla tossed off would please the Diana fans.

Camilla is due some pretty vicious karma and I believe that she would end up being replaced if Carole were so inclined.

Carole would have to be deranged to want to bed Charles when she has a nice husband who would be more of a " catch" for any woman than Charles could ever be Prince or no Prince. Charles IMO is a mess.

Camilla probably turns a blind eye if Charles has side affairs. She has it made--the perks, people kow towing to her, and all the privileges for doing the very minimum work.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on March 11, 2013, 07:46:33 pm
No; Charles doesn't think Camilla is ugly and it's not looks, it's the ability of Camilla to pamper Charles and make him feel important. I bet Charles is possibly eying an affair and Carole does look like a sharper, younger version of Camilla and being undesired by the rest of the world is possibly part of the attraction. Carole is not hot hot hot by our standards, but that isn't what Charles is looking for. I don't think Camilla is as desirable to Charles now that Camilla has refined herself and I don't think Camilla is tending to Charles as often as we might think. She still retires to Raymill and she is abdicating her position the same way Diana did over time.

Carole vs Camilla, Carole would win because Carole has so much more to gain through a marriage and teh press would LOVE the idea of Carole becoming Princess of Wales and then seeing Camilla tossed off would please the Diana fans.

Camilla is due some pretty vicious karma and I believe that she would end up being replaced if Carole were so inclined.

Carole would have to be deranged to want to bed Charles when she has a nice husband who would be more of a " catch" for any woman than Charles could ever be Prince or no Prince. Charles IMO is a mess.

Camilla probably turns a blind eye if Charles has side affairs. She has it made--the perks, people kow towing to her, and all the privileges for doing the very minimum work.

I believe Carole would bed Chucky if she thought it would get titles for her and Mike and titled spouses for Pippy and Creepy James.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 11, 2013, 09:36:51 pm
If Carole were to bed Charles then it would destroy the family image that they have worked so hard to present to William. Carole is not that stupid especially since they can get a title without it. After all they hand out titles now as one would bottles of water at a sporting event in the heat.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on March 11, 2013, 10:25:08 pm
That title is as imaginary as Carole's affair.  :laugh:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on April 23, 2013, 04:11:35 am
Prince Charles's activity centre nest egg ruined by rare peregrine falcon

PRINCE Charles’s plans to create an activity centre in a world ­famous ­wilderness have been defeated...by a rare bird.


The Prince’s Duchy of Cornwall ­estate failed in its efforts to develop an unused quarry on Dartmoor, Devon, ­because of a peregrine falcon.

The protected bird of prey saw off the developers after planners said they feared the project at Merrivale, near Yelverton, would ­force it to abandon its home and breeding site.

Members of the Dartmoor National Park development management committee kicked out the Duchy’s project earlier this month on the grounds that the falcon cannot be threatened by a commercial enterprise.

Under the law, it is an offence to ­intentionally or recklessly disturb protected birds close to their nesting sites during the breeding season.

A pair of peregrines were reported to have been seen mating at the site in March. They also attempted to breed in 2012 but were unsuccessful.

The RSPB opposed the Duchy’s scheme, which would have included a zip wire, climbing walls and kayaking facilities.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/393473/Prince-Charles-s-activity-centre-nest-egg-ruined-by-rare-peregrine-falcon




Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on April 23, 2013, 05:40:36 am
More development? What happened to conserving/conservation?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on April 24, 2013, 03:55:04 am
  Kuei Fey

        you have brought up exactly what many people dislike about Charles.

    He is usually lecturing and patronising to the masses, and yet is as money grubbing as the next toff.

    HYPOCRITE  is a word you have used before.

      
                    :thankyou:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on April 25, 2013, 07:25:46 pm
Duchess of Cornwall's unusual food confession


THE Duchess of Cornwall has dined on haute cuisine prepared by the world’s top chefs but yesterday she confessed there is nothing she likes to eat more than raw peas.
Camilla, 65, revealed her love for the simple vegetable during the launch of a national competition to encourage youngsters to grow produce for a harvest festival celebration at Westminster Abbey.

When interviewed by eight-year-old reporter Annika Matharu from Godolphin Junior School in Slough, Berkshire, the Duchess said: “I like them cooked but I tell you what I really like - eating peas straight from the garden.

“If you take them straight from the pod they are delicious and really sweet.”

The Duchess then opened up about spending time with her own five grandchildren saying: “I take all my grandchildren down to the garden and they spend hours and hours eating peas.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/394635/Duchess-of-Cornwall-s-unusual-food-confession


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on April 25, 2013, 07:28:01 pm
Odd picture. Five grandchildren spending hours eating peas. Must get upset stomachs after a while. Silly woman.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: AnaBolena on April 25, 2013, 07:53:25 pm
^ My Grandmother used to do that with me when I was little.  I loved eating the sweet ripe peas - and no, you do not get an upset tummy!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on April 25, 2013, 08:00:42 pm
I did. I overate. So perhaps I am biased about this.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: AnaBolena on April 26, 2013, 07:25:27 pm
LOL Sandy, I wasn't allowed to overeat them.  Naughty girl.  :tehe:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Stephanie on May 09, 2013, 11:32:02 am
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/may/09/prince-charles-climate-change-sceptics
King tampon sides with the climate scaremongers .
Like with homeopathy, he doesn't need a scientific consensus. :nervous:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on May 09, 2013, 10:35:11 pm
If Charles would try living what he preaches then people might take him seriously. He might as well try it because the hypocritical approach isn't working for him.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on May 23, 2013, 05:30:50 pm
Tim Ewart ‏@EwartRoyale 10m
Quote
Helicopter carrying Charles and Camilla to Wales developed technical fault 14 mins after take off and diverted to nearby aerodrome
Pilot of Charles and Camilla helicopter makes controlled emergency landing described as "hairy experience." Rest of trip by car. 3 hrs late

He shouldn't have been using a helicopter in the first place. Leave early enough and use a car or the train just like everyone else does.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on May 23, 2013, 05:45:38 pm
http://www.mirror.co.uk/incoming/prince-charles-emergency-landing-drama-1907215
Quote
Prince Charles and Camilla's helicopter had to make an emergency landing today after a "hairy" mid-air drama.

A technical fault forced the royal helicopter to urgently divert to a nearby aerodrome 15 minutes after take-off.

The Duke and Duchess of Cornwall were flying from London to Wales for a day-long tour to Hay and its popular annual festival of literature.

But minutes after boarding their flight they were urgently diverted to Denham Aerodrome, in Buckinghamshire.

The helicopter, believed to be carrying up to seven people, developed a "technical fault" minutes after take off.

"The pilot carried out a controlled emergency landing after diverting to the airport," a spokesman for the royal couple said.

"It was quite a hairy experience," a source close to the palace added.

Despite the unscheduled stop the royal couple transferred to cars and continued on to the market town of Hay-on-Wye by road.

They finally arrived close to three hours late but emerged looking relaxed and smiling to be greeted by a crowd of several hundred well-wishers.

"They were unflappable despite what they went through. If anyone else had gone through what they did they would have cancelled their day," one pensioner, who preferred not to be named, said.

I wonder why he didn't want to be named.   :tehe:




Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on May 23, 2013, 06:13:34 pm
So we risked having Willy Middleton as future King?  :o Hang in there Chuck!!! We don't want Queen Carole  :nervous:.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on May 23, 2013, 08:07:08 pm
   .. don't hang in there Chas .. just take your old nag and leave quietly.  :*butt*:

       Carole M will have no input on policy or running of the land, since Kings and Queens don't have much say in a Constitutional Monarchy.   :announcement:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on May 27, 2013, 08:10:03 am
http://www.themortonreport.com/blog/which-famous-man-is-psychologically-dependent-on-another/

Which Famous Man Is Psychologically Dependent on Another?

Quote
This is a very famous man, known all over the world. Very rich. Very spoilt. Very privileged. He’s married, happily, according to some. But there is a man in his life that he cannot let go. They are not lovers, although rumours have linked them together. It’s not even a bromance, yet our man has become psychologically dependent on his man. As someone who has professionally observed the relationship tells me, "Dependency is like love — a very powerful emotion. Love can be blind and extreme dependency can too. He sees what he wants to see. The other man can be Superman in his eyes.”

Quote
Charlotte Germane • 4 months ago

I'm guessing the Prince of Wales and his former valet Michael Fawcett.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on May 27, 2013, 04:03:19 pm
LOL this one is too easy.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: mysha on May 27, 2013, 08:42:31 pm
Charles is so messed up.There were rumours once he was gay


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: mysha on May 27, 2013, 08:44:37 pm
Then again if he was, it might begin to explain Camilla and her separate house


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on May 27, 2013, 09:43:16 pm


   The Prince of Wails and Fawcett the Fence ... and banning of publication of anything murky about this pair....


 ... SAYS A WHOLE LOT .. doesn"t it ?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on May 28, 2013, 02:36:24 am
Indeed it does.  :thumbsup:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on May 31, 2013, 11:24:06 am
Richard Palmer ‏@RoyalReporter 5h

Quote
Prince Charles flew to Romania yesterday after three days on a private visit to Armenia.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on May 31, 2013, 03:34:37 pm
Charles has done his annual dinner to get money for his charities. This year it was done in St. James P.

An "in"famous patron is Porcelanosa. Hello Spain has an agreement with Charles so Porcelanosa and a couple of famous people of Spain are invited, the mag does an editorial and Porcelanosa gets publicity. Charles of course gets money for his pets projects.

The porcelanosa owners are so close to Camz and Charles that when they came to Spain in the gala dinner Camilla asked about them but no one knew what to say because someone had banned them from the gala dinner.   :tehe:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on May 31, 2013, 08:17:46 pm
Richard Palmer ‏@RoyalReporter 5h
Quote
Prince Charles flew to Romania yesterday after three days on a private visit to Armenia.

What on earth?

Is he trying to get the Romanian crown now for himself?

There have been pieces linking him with Vlad Tepes (the Impaler) and he is suddenly interested in conservation in Romania.

King Mihai is the current king and he has heirs, but that wouldn't stop Charles from trying to purloin something that isn't his.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: berlin on June 01, 2013, 01:13:18 am
Queen, oops I mean Princess, Beatrix is a prominent member of the Bilderberg Group.  I guess we can expect King Willem-Alexander and Maxima to become the same.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on June 03, 2013, 03:37:28 am
Richard Palmer ‏@RoyalReporter 5h
Quote
Prince Charles flew to Romania yesterday after three days on a private visit to Armenia.

What on earth?

Is he trying to get the Romanian crown now for himself?

There have been pieces linking him with Vlad Tepes (the Impaler) and he is suddenly interested in conservation in Romania.

King Mihai is the current king and he has heirs, but that wouldn't stop Charles from trying to purloin something that isn't his.

He since he hasn't succeeded in becoming King/Queen of England, maybe he wants to stage a coup de ta.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on June 03, 2013, 02:54:51 pm
http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/404671/Camilla-takes-a-trip-down-memory-lane-as-she-returns-to-home-she-sold-to-Pink-Floyd
Quote
Camilla was guest of honour at a garden open day at Middlewick House, the seven-bedroom 18th century house in Corsham, Wiltshire, where she and her first husband, Andrew Parker Bowles, lived for a decade until they sold it to the drummer and his wife Annette in 1995.

The Masons opened their garden to the public to raise money for two charities that count Camilla as their patron, the Wiltshire Bobby Van Trust and the Wiltshire Air Ambulance Charitable Trust, and met the Duchess when she arrived for the party on Sunday afternoon.

Camilla was keen to see the old place, a beautiful house built in Cotswold stone, and toured the gardens and broadleaf woodland which she once nurtured, before meeting members of the public and representatives of her two charities.

During her visit, she also went to the paddock and fed the donkeys and the Masons' two kune kune pigs, called Porky and Bess.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on June 03, 2013, 02:57:03 pm
She looks very old in the pics. Did she get liposuction? There are rumors that she did.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on June 03, 2013, 03:18:45 pm
Not sure a honest doctor would take a chance on giving her Liposuction at her age and the shape she's in. Maybe it's the belt making her look as if she has a waist  ???



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on June 03, 2013, 04:06:26 pm
Richard Palmer ‏@RoyalReporter 5h
Quote
Prince Charles flew to Romania yesterday after three days on a private visit to Armenia.
What on earth?

Is he trying to get the Romanian crown now for himself?

There have been pieces linking him with Vlad Tepes (the Impaler) and he is suddenly interested in conservation in Romania.

King Mihai is the current king and he has heirs, but that wouldn't stop Charles from trying to purloin something that isn't his.
He since he hasn't succeeded in becoming King/Queen of England, maybe he wants to stage a coup de ta.

No doubt; there is already a Crown princess of Romania (Margarieta) and I am disgusted that Charles is trying to take over the Romanian countryside via the Prince's Trust.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: mysha on June 03, 2013, 06:27:11 pm
Think it is a belt and the fat from a lipo is best sent on fast track to her face


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on June 03, 2013, 06:47:44 pm
Rumour has it that he bought another house in Romania but it's being denied by his PR office.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: mysha on June 03, 2013, 10:41:29 pm
Very interesting as to why ? such an odd thing to do ?
do you think he thinks there is something that might need him to seek exile ?
there are more than enough in the closet, Fawsett, Saville, and so on


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on June 11, 2013, 07:36:18 pm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-22860554

Quote
The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall have been given a starring role in one of Britain's most popular children's comics.

Their characters visit Bash Street School in this week's Beano.

The special edition was created to mark a visit by Charles and Camilla, known in Scotland as the Duke and Duchess of Rothesay, to publisher DC Thomson's Dundee head office.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on June 11, 2013, 07:38:26 pm
I posted this on another thread (re: Camilla promotion). Why does the man need to point at things so much?  And the usual comment about how happy Camzilla makes him. I guess Philip is happy the two are not having a big photo op visiting him in the hospital with her grinning inanely at the cameras. But I suppose the two won't spare the public that.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on June 11, 2013, 09:31:20 pm
  Charles is either pointing his finger or putting it on his nose ... Camz has that habit too ... can't imagine shaking hands with them... Ewwww.

    Chas and Camz in a cartoon ... looks like they have found their intellectual equals  :tehe:

   


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on July 17, 2013, 04:03:23 pm
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BPYeax2CEAQuVLx.jpg

Birthday Cake being cut with a sword. It is Camillas 149th birthday today give or take a few years. I may have been counting the wrinkles on her face so she may not be celebrating her 149th.   :tehe:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on July 17, 2013, 07:34:44 pm
 :tehe:

  Why doesn't someone buy the woman a decent bra for her birthday ...  :June:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: mysha on July 17, 2013, 08:42:55 pm
Bra for those utters and a Harrods bag for her head ( one must be posh about these bags )
I am surprised she does not have bruises on her knees. She looks older than the Queen

Lets take a pic and distract from the tax evading Duchy that should do Cornwell a favour and buy her a steel re enforced bra as they wave them ta ta


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on July 17, 2013, 09:54:43 pm
 :tehe:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on September 08, 2013, 10:55:12 pm
Quote
http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/427710/Sad-reality-of-Camilla-s-niece-Emma-Parker-Bowles

Sad reality of Camilla’s niece Emma Parker Bowles

IT IS a far cry from her life as a London society girl whose aunt married Prince Charles, but this was Emma Parker Bowles last week in Los Angeles.

Camilla’s niece, a former model, Top Gear magazine writer and presenter of the Vroom Vroom television motor show, went to LA to chase her dream of presenting a motoring reality show on a major network in America.

To date there have been no takers...today the 39-year-old is eking out a living rescuing stray dogs in Hollywood.

Emma, who battled drug and alcohol addiction when she was young and has revealed she suffers from bipolar disorder, lives in an unprepossessing one- bedroom rented apartment in the Hollywood Hills.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on September 10, 2013, 11:17:08 am
You know, this reporting is really nasty. Leave this poor girl alone. Go after the ones who really deserve it.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: RoyalWatcher on September 10, 2013, 03:38:34 pm
People can't help who they are related too....and Emma is just like millions of other young adults who followed a dream that didn't work out.  At least she does something with her time.  Geez.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on September 12, 2013, 01:06:42 am
I don't think it's not as bad as the press is trying to portray. When I was in LA I read that she was working on projects for tv, producing something. Also living in the Hollywood Hills is quite expensive and it's a desired place to live by people in the industry.  I think the Daily Mail just put a negative spin on it.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on September 19, 2013, 09:32:45 pm
Royal Central‏@RoyalCentral
Prince Charles has officially become the oldest heir in British history today, surpassing King William IV who acceded in 1830.

Royal Central‏@RoyalCentral
To clarify, our point today was that P. Charles is now the oldest heir in British history. Sophia of Hanover is of course the oldest heiress


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on September 20, 2013, 12:52:08 am
Charles has had a great run as Prince of Wales and he has nothing to be upset about being the "oldest heir." His mother had him when she was young and became Queen at a young age.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: serene grace on September 20, 2013, 01:45:58 am
True.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on September 20, 2013, 02:00:54 am
Charles has had a great run as Prince of Wales and he has nothing to be upset about being the "oldest heir." His mother had him when she was young and became Queen at a young age.

He's done really well when you look at the fact that he founded a charitable version of a corporation and has run it spectacularly well.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on September 24, 2013, 03:17:36 pm
'William and Harry inherited their love of dancing from me' says Prince Charles

The heir to the throne says he still enjoys "the old one-two" but has had to slow down since becoming a grandfather






William and Harry have won fans throughout the Commonwealth with their enthusiasm for dancing.

But the brothers have their father to thank for their natural rhythm, Prince Charles has claimed.

The brothers have gained a reputation for needing little or no invitation to get into groove during their royal engagements in recent years.

And while the heir to the throne joked about his own prowess on the dance floor, he admitted he has had to slow down since becoming a grandfather in a new interview.

When Charles first spoke to Australian magazine Women's Weekly in 1974 he declared, "if I hear rhythmic music, I just want to get up and dance."

Asked if he still feels the beat, Charles replied: "Perhaps, it's slightly less becoming once you get to my age."

He added: "I think given half a chance though, the old one-two and the two-step can come in handy. I'm glad to say that both my sons have inherited it, I think.

"They're very good. They do make me laugh when they get going."


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-william-prince-harry-inherited-2296786


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on September 24, 2013, 04:35:09 pm
Charles is such a jerk. Diana was better than he was at dancing and studied ballet. He at least could have mentioned the woman he chose to be the broodmare.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on September 24, 2013, 05:47:16 pm
Oh for God sake  :bored: ...


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on September 24, 2013, 05:56:21 pm
Not surprised at your reaction Jane. Charles looks ridiculous dancing. I don't think William is exactly a good dancer, he looks very awkward. Harry got the moves from his mother.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on September 24, 2013, 06:19:40 pm
all 3 of them look awkward when they dance


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on September 24, 2013, 08:56:58 pm
He was just chit chatting for God  sake making jokes while doing so ... there should be a law preventing the trio from dancing in public ...


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on September 24, 2013, 09:01:29 pm
Charles doesn't just "chit chat"--he's always aware of self promotion for himself and Camilla. Charles does not do well when he tries to be "cute." He seems more awkward. William is the same way when he tries to "joke."


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: meememe on September 24, 2013, 10:06:25 pm
Charles has joked all his life and has done it quite well. Even this story includes a quote from 1974 before he met Diana and he was known as someone who would dance and take the mickey out of himself all the time. He has done so since before meeting Diana, during his marriage and ever since.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on September 25, 2013, 01:24:40 am
It's a matter of opinion. Maybe some people like Charles humor. I think his humor falls flat and William has the same problem.

Diana was a good dancer too and studied ballet. Charles and Diana danced well together despite it all.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on October 18, 2013, 02:06:49 am
I wonder just how happy Charles is in his marriage; yes, he's married to the 'love of his life,' but thing is, that mistresses never make good wives. Since Charles had been paying for her upkeep, so much upkeep, he must have some resentment. I don't think he respects her; loves her, yes, but does not respect her.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on October 18, 2013, 08:45:00 pm
This is probably very true. I'm sure there is a lot of resentment there.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on October 19, 2013, 04:13:09 am
I wonder just how happy Charles is in his marriage; yes, he's married to the 'love of his life,' but thing is, that mistresses never make good wives. Since Charles had been paying for her upkeep, so much upkeep, he must have some resentment. I don't think he respects her; loves her, yes, but does not respect her.
[/quote
I'm not even sure he loves her. I think he loves himself the most. I think he may even prefer Fawcett to her now.

I don't think Camilla cares if Charles loves or respects her. She got all the marbles and is the cat that got the cream. She knows after his confessions and spin he'd look like a fool if he dumped her.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on October 30, 2013, 05:50:35 pm
Prince Charles warns hit TV shows like Downton Abbey and X Factor are at risk

PRINCE Charles has warned that hit shows such as X Factor and Downton Abbey will be at risk unless Britain's television industry trains more technicians.



The heir to the throne launched a campaign today to highlight a national skills shortage in the TV industry, which generated £17.5 billion last year - about one percent of the nation's economic output - and get more young people to train for the jobs.

Charles, 64, who is patron of the Royal Television Society, named top shows such as Doctor Who, Top Gear and "my darling wife's very own favourite - Strictly Come Dancing".

He said: "None of these amazing programmes would have been possible without the immense talent of British writers, producers, directors and on-screen talent.

"But there is also a hidden army of unsung heroes behind the cameras who are an equally important part of this success.

"Without the talent and sheer dedication of sound engineers, editors, and directors of photography, to name but a few, these great programmes, which give pleasure to millions, would never make it to our screens."

He suggested the skills shortage in production jobs threatened the industry's ability to continue to make high quality programmes. Britain is a world leader in television production skills and exports them around the world.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/440167/Prince-Charles-warns-hit-TV-shows-like-Downton-Abbey-and-X-Factor-are-at-risk


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on October 31, 2013, 11:15:07 pm
I have to agree with Prince Charles about this.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 01, 2013, 12:29:44 am
In the US this area of work is very competitive.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on November 05, 2013, 06:35:39 pm
Rebecca English‏@RE_DailyMail
Country Life has a new guest editor celebrating his 65th birthday....... pic.twitter.com/MeKzptOK7F
https://twitter.com/RE_DailyMail/status/397683901105045504/photo/1



A Country Life for him: Prince Charles guest edits magazine to mark his 65th birthday... and his star writer is Alan Titchmarsh
 Heir selected stories for next week's edition of 116-year-old magazine
 Edition also features coverage of the Prince's work with rural communities
 Magazine will also have features on Charles' homes and gardens


Looking relaxed in what is arguably his most comfortable environment, the Prince of Wales is today unveiled as guest editor of Country Life magazine.
 
Charles agreed to turn journalist to mark his 65th birthday next week and the commemorative edition will be published on Wednesday November 13, the day before he officially becomes a pensioner.

 
The Prince, who has never edited a national publication before, has chosen the majority of the 116-year-old weekly magazine’s content


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487724/Prince-Charles-guest-edits-Country-Life-magazine-mark-65th-birthday.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on November 09, 2013, 02:54:35 am
He carried his tonsils everywhere in a jar - even as he gave imaginary sermons in Windsor Castle chapel' On the eve of the Prince's Charles' 65th birthday, a fascinating insight into his childhood

Prince Charles – ‘rosy, plump, healthy and bawling’ and ‘with a fair fluff of hair’, according to a courtier – was born at 9.14pm on 14 November, 1948, 65 years ago next Thursday.

A crowd of 3,000 huddled outside Buckingham Palace and cheered when the birth announcement was posted on the railings after a 30-hour labour, although an excited policeman had already tipped off those at the front.

The birth of the 7lb 6oz future king, second in line to the throne and the first grandchild for George VI and Queen Elizabeth, came almost a year after the princess’s marriage to Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten. Marion Crawford, governess to Elizabeth and Margaret, recalled Elizabeth revealing her pregnancy by whispering shyly, ‘I think we’ll get out my old pram, Crawfie.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2492475/He-carried-tonsils-jar--gave-imaginary-sermons-Windsor-Castle-chapel-On-eve-Princes-Charles-65th-birthday-fascinating-insight-childhood.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on November 09, 2013, 12:06:06 pm
Hmmm, the comments are not very good.  Another PR failure.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 11, 2013, 01:10:05 am
You know, I'm surprised that Charles didn't study things like diplomacy and economy and farming if he had such opinions on them. After all, they are relevant to the nation and I am surprised he didn't end up getting a degree in them. He is smart and he is savvy, but it's too bad he's so intellectually untrained.

Quote
e carried his tonsils everywhere in a jar - even as he gave imaginary sermons in Windsor Castle chapel' On the eve of the Prince's Charles' 65th birthday, a fascinating insight into his childhood

He sounds like one of those creepy little kids who ends up becoming a serial killer; stuff like this, carrying his tonsils? Imaginary sermons?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 11, 2013, 01:14:10 am
Charles is no intellectual giant but poses as one. Charles really should avoid making confessions such as carrying around tonsils. He doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: terrajoule on November 11, 2013, 06:58:18 am
Quote
He carried his tonsils everywhere in a jar .....

Um... Sweetie, that's not a toy. Ick!  :- 


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on November 13, 2013, 03:04:43 am
Prince Charles can soon start pension

Britain's heir to the throne Prince Charles can draw his state pension from Thursday when he turns 65 - despite having yet to start the job he has eyed for a lifetime.

Queen Elizabeth II's eldest son has endured the longest wait in history by a British heir, and it hasn't been easy.

But as his 87-year-old mother cuts back on her workload, Charles is increasingly taking centre stage.

Fresh from a tour of India, he will take the queen's place on Friday at the Commonwealth heads of government summit in Sri Lanka - an event the monarch, in power since 1952, has only ever missed once.

Charles will donate his pension to a charity for the elderly, in keeping with his reputation as a busy philanthropist.

'I feel more than anything else it's my duty to worry about everybody and their lives in this country, to try and find a way of improving things,' he told Time magazine recently.

http://www.skynews.com.au/showbiz/article.aspx?id=923726


Prince Charles to claim state pension – and donate it to charity
Heir's 65th birthday is next week and he will give statutory entitlement from navy service to charity for older people



His retirement years will not exactly be typical – for a start there's a rather big job still to be done at an unknown point in his future. But the Prince of Wales has indicated that in one respect at least he will mark his 65th birthday next week like any other pensioner – by claiming his state pension.

Clarence House has confirmed that Prince Charles has completed the necessary claim forms and from 14 November will claim his statutory entitlement of up to £110.15 per week.

Rather than saving it for Saga holidays and membership of the National Trust, however, the prince intends to donate the sum to a charity supporting older people, the identity of which is yet to be confirmed. Happily, with an income of £19m last year from his Duchy of Cornwall estate, he is unlikely to find himself out of pocket.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/07/prince-charles-claim-state-pension-navy-donate-charity


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on November 13, 2013, 03:21:44 am
It's not like he needs that money and he certainly did not earn it!


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on November 13, 2013, 02:11:43 pm
Supermarkets are exploiting our farmers, says Prince Charles in impassioned plea to save British countryside which is ‘as precious as any cathedral’
Charles issued warning over countryside's future in Country Life editorial
He has guest edited the magazine to mark his 65th birthday tomorrow
The prince says rural communities are facing their 'toughest challenges'
'Farmers have taken a battering in recent years,' he writes



Prince Charles has issued an impassioned plea to save a  British countryside which is ‘as precious as any cathedral’.
In an editorial in Country Life magazine, written to mark his 65th birthday, the future king says the  British countryside is the ‘backbone’ of our national identity.

He also writes at length about the challenges facing farming communities, his frustration at estimates that 40 per cent of the food produced in the world goes to waste and even accuses supermarkets of exploiting small farmers.
Charles says: ‘I find it fascinating to watch how dramatically the landscape changes and how those changes affect the character of people, making the British countryside the unacknowledged backbone of our national identity.
'It is as precious as any of our great cathedrals and we erode it at our peril.’
Charles, who becomes a pensioner tomorrow, agreed to guest edit the 116-year-old magazine to mark the occasion.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2505011/Supermarkets-exploiting-farmers-says-Prince-Charles-impassioned-plea-save-British-countryside-precious-cathedral.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 13, 2013, 03:12:02 pm
Prince Charles can soon start pension

Britain's heir to the throne Prince Charles can draw his state pension from Thursday when he turns 65 - despite having yet to start the job he has eyed for a lifetime.

Queen Elizabeth II's eldest son has endured the longest wait in history by a British heir, and it hasn't been easy.

But as his 87-year-old mother cuts back on her workload, Charles is increasingly taking centre stage.

Fresh from a tour of India, he will take the queen's place on Friday at the Commonwealth heads of government summit in Sri Lanka - an event the monarch, in power since 1952, has only ever missed once.

Charles will donate his pension to a charity for the elderly, in keeping with his reputation as a busy philanthropist.

'I feel more than anything else it's my duty to worry about everybody and their lives in this country, to try and find a way of improving things,' he told Time magazine recently.

http://www.skynews.com.au/showbiz/article.aspx?id=923726


Prince Charles to claim state pension – and donate it to charity
Heir's 65th birthday is next week and he will give statutory entitlement from navy service to charity for older people



His retirement years will not exactly be typical – for a start there's a rather big job still to be done at an unknown point in his future. But the Prince of Wales has indicated that in one respect at least he will mark his 65th birthday next week like any other pensioner – by claiming his state pension.

Clarence House has confirmed that Prince Charles has completed the necessary claim forms and from 14 November will claim his statutory entitlement of up to £110.15 per week.

Rather than saving it for Saga holidays and membership of the National Trust, however, the prince intends to donate the sum to a charity supporting older people, the identity of which is yet to be confirmed. Happily, with an income of £19m last year from his Duchy of Cornwall estate, he is unlikely to find himself out of pocket.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/07/prince-charles-claim-state-pension-navy-donate-charity

Charles "endured" this. Oh please. The writers make it sound like he was in prison or ill. The man has it made and certainly did not "suffer" though he likes his pity parties.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on November 14, 2013, 04:35:58 am
Charles is the most difficult person in the world to buy a present for, reveals Camilla: Duchess of Cornwall pays tribute to 'workaholic' husband as he celebrates his 65th birthday
Wife Camilla revealed Prince Charles was unlikely to celebrate becoming a pensioner unless she 'hopped up and down singing happy birthday'
Revelations offer charming insight into the couple's relationship and a rarely-glimpsed side of the future king
Prince of Wales is already the longest serving heir in British history


The Duchess of Cornwall has paid tribute to her ‘workaholic’ husband on his 65th birthday, revealing: ‘He’s not one for chilling.’
In an unprecedented interview during the couple’s official tour of India, Camilla also admitted that Prince Charles was ‘the most difficult person in the world to buy a present for’ – and that he was unlikely to celebrate becoming a pensioner unless she ‘hopped up and down singing happy birthday’.
Her revelations offer a charming insight into the couple’s relationship and a rarely-glimpsed side of the future king, who is already the longest serving heir in British history and today turns a pensioner.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2506931/Camilla-pays-tribute-Prince-Charles-celebrates-65th-birthday.html


I know it won't happen but the best 65th birthday present the Queen could give Charles is her abdication

Prince Charles, who turns 65 today, deserves a happy birthday. For his entire life he has been under the unrelenting gaze of the world’s media, enduring jokes about everything from the state of his marriage to the shape of his ears.
He certainly has his idiosyncrasies, from his fondness for alternative medicine to his hatred of modern architecture.
Yet, in many of his causes, such as organic farming, the defence of the countryside and the conservation of our heritage, he has simply been ahead of his time.
And, certainly, Britain’s charities have no more enthusiastic a patron. The Prince’s Trust alone works with more than 40,000 disadvantaged youngsters every year.
All the same, Charles would not be human if he were not a little frustrated. All his life he has effectively been in limbo, training for a post that he will not occupy until he is past the age of retirement.
The conventional wisdom holds that when he finally succeeds to the throne, he will struggle to live up to his mother’s stunningly high standards.
Indeed, among Britain’s tiny and eccentric band of republicans, hopes are reportedly high that the advent of Charles III will end our love affair with the House of Windsor.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2506913/Best-present-Queen-Prince-Charles-65th-birthday-abdication.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 14, 2013, 05:41:39 am
Prince Charles can soon start pension
Britain's heir to the throne Prince Charles can draw his state pension from Thursday when he turns 65 - despite having yet to start the job he has eyed for a lifetime.
Queen Elizabeth II's eldest son has endured the longest wait in history by a British heir, and it hasn't been easy.
But as his 87-year-old mother cuts back on her workload, Charles is increasingly taking centre stage.
Fresh from a tour of India, he will take the queen's place on Friday at the Commonwealth heads of government summit in Sri Lanka - an event the monarch, in power since 1952, has only ever missed once.
Charles will donate his pension to a charity for the elderly, in keeping with his reputation as a busy philanthropist.
'I feel more than anything else it's my duty to worry about everybody and their lives in this country, to try and find a way of improving things,' he told Time magazine recently.
http://www.skynews.com.au/showbiz/article.aspx?id=923726Prince Charles to claim state pension – and donate it to charity
Heir's 65th birthday is next week and he will give statutory entitlement from navy service to charity for older people

His retirement years will not exactly be typical – for a start there's a rather big job still to be done at an unknown point in his future. But the Prince of Wales has indicated that in one respect at least he will mark his 65th birthday next week like any other pensioner – by claiming his state pension.
Clarence House has confirmed that Prince Charles has completed the necessary claim forms and from 14 November will claim his statutory entitlement of up to £110.15 per week.
Rather than saving it for Saga holidays and membership of the National Trust, however, the prince intends to donate the sum to a charity supporting older people, the identity of which is yet to be confirmed. Happily, with an income of £19m last year from his Duchy of Cornwall estate, he is unlikely to find himself out of pocket.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/07/prince-charles-claim-state-pension-navy-donate-charity
Charles "endured" this. Oh please. The writers make it sound like he was in prison or ill. The man has it made and certainly did not "suffer" though he likes his pity parties.

I wonder how diplomats and all the people he's met feel seeing that Charles views spending time with them a burden. I feel the same about HM and the rest of that whining family; seeing people who embody living history is such a TRIAL and living in a palace is such a TRIAL and being secure is such a TRIAL!


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on November 15, 2013, 02:32:01 am
She's come of age too - thanks to team Camilla: From a pariah pelted with bread rolls to the Duchess who has won over her doubters


Only a day after becoming a pensioner, Prince Charles is reaching another landmark – representing his mother at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting for the first time.

But if tonight’s grand event is an historic moment for the prince, spare a thought for the woman in the designer evening gown by his side.

For while Charles sets out to prove he is a worthy king-in-waiting, Camilla will be there as his queen, laughing, chatting and gently massaging the egos of 50 world leaders and their spouses.

Much has already been made of the significance of the Prince’s role at the bi-annual meeting of the Family of Nations – an organisation deemed historic by some, but one which the 87-year-old monarch considers among the most significant legacies of her reign.

But as one official put it: ‘This is not just an historic moment for the Prince of Wales, it is a huge leap forward for the Duchess too.

‘She’s gone from effectively being a country housewife to holding court with world leaders in the space of just a few years.’

It is a remarkable turn of events for the woman who was once such a pariah she was said to have been pelted with bread rolls outside her local supermarket.

Slowly but surely, Camilla, now 66, has won over the doubters. It has been a slow process.

But she has surrounded herself with a small coterie of advisers, largely women, who are fiercely loyal and helped her prepare for this, one of her biggest tests so far on the world stage.

For someone once considered to be one of the most famous mistresses in the world, it is surely telling that the Duchess of Cornwall is able to inspire genuine friendship and loyalty in so many of her own sex.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2507606/Shes-come-age--thanks-team-Camilla-From-pariah-pelted-bread-rolls-Duchess-won-doubters.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 15, 2013, 02:41:52 am
Charles or Fawcett must write this drivel. No wonder Will is messed up. More PR spin. Charles should just stop this stuff and not try to push Camilla down the public's throats. Not everybody adores her to put it mildly. If he pushes her out there, it won't change anything--he'll make her Queen Consort irregardless but won't change for the most part how people feel about her. I think sides already have been formed--those who love her, those who don't care, and those who loathe her. Charles can't brainwash people with this nonsense.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 15, 2013, 02:54:06 am
Ran out of time.

Two things.

The bread roll story was supposedly not true.

Charles sounds more wimpy than WIll  in this article. Seems just weird and needing a nanny to help him. He's not doing himself any favors by putting out this drivel. I also notice the DM is editing comments before they appear in these Charles articles.

As I said no wonder Will is messed up.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 15, 2013, 02:59:46 am
Charles should just stop this stuff and not try to push Camilla down the public's throats. Not everybody adores her to put it mildly. If he pushes her out there, it won't change anything--he'll make her Queen Consort irregardless but won't change for the most part how people feel about her. I think sides already have been formed--those who love her, those who don't care, and those who loathe her. Charles can't brainwash people with this nonsense.

You know, the real problem is how Charles can't accept that Camilla is only tolerated, not loved. He got to marry her and he should be grateful and tell Camilla to lump it if people dislike her. This is a problem that William has to, William should make Kate accept that there are people out there who don't like her and make Kate get on with it.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on November 15, 2013, 04:31:15 am
^
I am not keen on either of them but to be fair to Camilla, she has had to overcome more than Kate. People were always going to dislike Camilla for her part in the fail of the marriage of Charles and Diana.

Kate had a fairly clean slate and could have made quite a difference. She has had more education that Camilla and came with no baggage but she seems totally disinterested in trying to make anything of the role. She only seems interested in dressing up and photo ops (when it suits her).


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 15, 2013, 05:14:24 am
If Charles had not coddled Camilla, there would never have been a Kate since after all, Charles would have been focusing on his sons and expecting his wife to do what his first wife did, i.e., get on with it and go do her job as his Consort. He would have been focused on William and Harry and neither would have ended up in the messes they were in.

Kate has had a decade to get used to the naysayers and being criticized and there is little to no way that she's going to win over everyone and she should have been used to press coverage by now. She should be used to the public eye and be used to all of this. Charles set a bad example by trying to make Camilla loved by everyone.

Thing is, that Charles should have told Camilla to get out and work at being loved.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 15, 2013, 02:31:50 pm
^
I am not keen on either of them but to be fair to Camilla, she has had to overcome more than Kate. People were always going to dislike Camilla for her part in the fail of the marriage of Charles and Diana.

Kate had a fairly clean slate and could have made quite a difference. She has had more education that Camilla and came with no baggage but she seems totally disinterested in trying to make anything of the role. She only seems interested in dressing up and photo ops (when it suits her).

Camilla did not have to overcome anything by herself. She had Charles to pay expensive fees to the spin doctors to try to whitewash their pasts. Kate seems to have a lot of excuses made for her and William does too--even invoking a phantom "edict" from the Queen that did not "allow" them to work for two years.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on November 15, 2013, 03:39:33 pm
^
I don't like either of them but Kate had a clean slate in comparison with Camilla. For Kate the world could have been her oyster and she could have made a lot of difference if she had taken on a major charity. They are both lightweights. Kate had opportunity, education and has wasted it. Camilla has a dubious background and however they want to spin it she is at best tolerated by some and disliked by others.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on November 24, 2013, 01:43:42 pm
Camilla Parker Bowles Palm Reading
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j7EPhQ1hNg0

Prince Charles Hand Reading

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DBvQnUzEG1A


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on November 25, 2013, 09:26:36 pm
Let's hope he doesn't have the same effect on Prince George! Prince Charles is greeted by screaming baby during shopping centre walkabout

    The new grandfather smiled at squealing girl as he met delighted crowds
    It was one of a number of engagements in Gloucestershire and Wiltshire
    He also personally set a plaque in a wall at a rural innovation centre



Prince Charles received a warm welcome from the crowd when he visited the Gloucestershire town today - with the exception of one highly emotional young lady.

But the heir to the throne was unflappable when confronted with a screaming baby girl as he toured a shopping centre in Cheltenham, smiling at the girl as she wailed in the arms of her mother, who looked delighted to be talking to the Prince.

His visit to the Regent Arcade, which has been given an external makeover to create a new Regency-inspired facade, was the last engagement of a particularly busy day for Prince Charles.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513349/Prince-Charles-greeted-screaming-baby-shopping-centre-walkabout.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 26, 2013, 01:16:56 am
Charles and his pointing. Not polite


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on November 27, 2013, 02:10:59 am
I know. He's done it for years and it's incredible rude.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on December 13, 2013, 05:27:51 pm
Quote
The thing that is worrisome about Charles is how he uses his influence in the UK to poke around - this whole thing he has going on with the UK intelligence service and how he gets his people to do internships in UK government departments - one wonders what he is up to.

You can tell he is trying to take the Romanian crown and I am certain that he would gladly take other crowns if he could. The BRF likes to angle towards the Russian crown and I am certain that given a chance he would gladly be King of Romania. Thing is, that the Kents play up how the Duke of Kent looks like Nicholas II and Charles plays up his relation to Vlad Tepes and I am certain that the estate in Romania is Charles establishing himself there. Charles wants other crowns and I am certain that HM wouldn't mind a new crown or two.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on December 13, 2013, 08:31:37 pm
^Its a shame he hasnt put the same level of energy into protecting the crown he is already in line for.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: True Brit on December 13, 2013, 09:31:18 pm
^^ Interesting idea KF. You know the story about Rudolph Hess and the Duke of Kent's involvement on behalf of the RF during the war to settle with Hitler so that they could maintain the British Empire leaving Hitler to rein over a federal Europe.

Part of this deal was the late Duke of Kent would restore the monarchy in Poland and General Sikorski was working to ring this about. So perhaps Poland is in PC's sights too?

Of course Kent and Sikorski both perished in plane crashes and the EU managed to bring about what the Third Reich failed to achieve.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on December 13, 2013, 10:34:35 pm
^Poland for Kent? When the russians where in the middle? That's too much even for the Windsors. I cannot believe that Churchill would go for the plan.

Though it is quite clear that Sikorski was assassinated thanks to the UK.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on December 14, 2013, 01:09:24 am
Who said the RF wasn't working behind Churchill's back? Right after Churchill's death, HM went on a trip to Germany, that should tell you what she thinks of Churchill.

Thing is, that the RF is oddly the one RF that the others avoid having much to do with. None of the other RF on the Continent socialize and Michael of Romania and the Romanovs are noticeable in the way they studiously avoid having anything to do with the BRF. Each year there is a London Summer ball hosted by Prince Rostislav and none of the Windsors are known to be invited or go at all. Right under their noses and yet the Windsors are not welcomed. Telling to say the least.

If the BRF were exposed as treating with Hitler in exchange for all of Europe, that would cause MASSIVE acts of diplomatic disaster. Imagine, while waving their hands patriotically the Windsors were in fact secretly making a pact to get Europe and keep Europe under the Nazi boot as long as they get to keep their crown. All the while soldiers were battling to free France and Poland and keep the US free and all the whole time, the US was also helping Britain fight off a Nazi invasion.

I wonder sometimes if Wallis and Edward VIII were in fact doing secret work for the RF; wouldn't that blow the lid off of the palaces. WWII vets would end up torching the palaces, or the relatives and descendants would. Imagine how the history books would have to be changed and how the BRF would be held up as the ultimate example of treason. A lot of aristocrats lost relatives in the second world war and I think there would be a tremendous amount of hatred towards the entire RF as a result.

^Its a shame he hasnt put the same level of energy into protecting the crown he is already in line for.

He's impatient and fanatically ambitious; I see that now.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Spice on December 14, 2013, 10:10:43 am
I don't agree with this theory that the RF wanted to do a deal with Hitler.  That aside, I just wanted to question one of your claims, that the continental RFs don;t socialise with the BRF.  Beatrix, Margrethe and Harald are all close to the BRF, in fact Harald is relatively closely related (the others are more distant relatives).  The ex-royal Greeks are extremely close to (and probably being funded by) the BRF.  I think its true that the continental ties are weakening somewhat with the advent of Wimpo&Waity, who I agree most if not all foreign royals have no time for.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on December 14, 2013, 09:20:22 pm
I don't buy into that conspiracy theory either - it was the duke of windsor who consired with the Nazi's not the reigning royal family - the duke and duchess actually went and stayed as house guests in Hitler's famous mountain retreat  - the abdication was a very lucky break for the British people who knows what he might have done if he had stayed on the throne

QE was devoted to Churchill - he guided her when she first became Queen and also stood as a counterweight against Mountbatten's attempts to railroad her.  I think the origin of those conspiracy theories is what the duke of windsor did - it tarred the whole family in the minds of some people.

As for the continental royals - the scandi's, benelux and the Netherlands are good models IMHO of monarchy - they are well liked in their countries - the monarchies in those countries are solid - and the various Crown Princes/Princesses all seem to take their jobs seriously and are involved in substantial things - but they aren't celebrities so of course W and W have no interest in them! 


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: YankeeDuchess on December 14, 2013, 10:21:03 pm
Who said the RF wasn't working behind Churchill's back? Right after Churchill's death, HM went on a trip to Germany, that should tell you what she thinks of Churchill.

Thing is, that the RF is oddly the one RF that the others avoid having much to do with. None of the other RF on the Continent socialize and Michael of Romania and the Romanovs are noticeable in the way they studiously avoid having anything to do with the BRF. Each year there is a London Summer ball hosted by Prince Rostislav and none of the Windsors are known to be invited or go at all. Right under their noses and yet the Windsors are not welcomed. Telling to say the least.

If the BRF were exposed as treating with Hitler in exchange for all of Europe, that would cause MASSIVE acts of diplomatic disaster. Imagine, while waving their hands patriotically the Windsors were in fact secretly making a pact to get Europe and keep Europe under the Nazi boot as long as they get to keep their crown. All the while soldiers were battling to free France and Poland and keep the US free and all the whole time, the US was also helping Britain fight off a Nazi invasion.

I wonder sometimes if Wallis and Edward VIII were in fact doing secret work for the RF; wouldn't that blow the lid off of the palaces. WWII vets would end up torching the palaces, or the relatives and descendants would. Imagine how the history books would have to be changed and how the BRF would be held up as the ultimate example of treason. A lot of aristocrats lost relatives in the second world war and I think there would be a tremendous amount of hatred towards the entire RF as a result.

^Its a shame he hasnt put the same level of energy into protecting the crown he is already in line for.

He's impatient and fanatically ambitious; I see that now.

Well IMO it always seemed to me they as in RF(Harry in Nazi uniform comes to mind) and most aristos do go and marry the Aryan look-blonde hair and blue eyes. It wouldn't surprise me if we do find out down the road that BRF were in line with Hitler and their plans. Question is was it for survival like Chelsy's dad or do they truly believe in Hilter's vision.  It was already released sometime ago King George did more than in WW2 behind the scenes. Before the Holocaust of WW2 there was 1189-90 massacres of Jews in London and their expulsion. England wasnt first. JHMO.  :dontknow: who knows.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on February 05, 2014, 01:50:28 am
Too bad Charles didn't try to be the first Prince of Wales to NOT have a mistress. He could have had a lot of popularity and a healthier home life as a result.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on February 06, 2014, 12:55:27 am
He didn't want to break a thousand years of tradition and try something new and groundbreaking.  :angry:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 06, 2014, 01:09:41 am
By all accounts Frederick, Prince of Wales (father of George III) was a faithful husband. George V when Prince of Wales was faithful to Mary, his wife.

So Charles could have emulated them.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Nighthawk on February 15, 2014, 01:13:13 pm
TRUTH ABOUT CHARLES  AND DIANA’S CHEATING
Quote
The Prince’s public image has been sadly distorted by the failure of his marriage to Diana and the repercussions of her tragic death.

The image she actively cultivated through the media was largely a fantasy which ensured she was  visualised as a victim, not just of fate, but of unfair treatment by the Royal Family, who had driven her to seek romantic comfort elsewhere.

Charles suffered the backlash from this and for years was heavily censured for his relationship with Camilla, the wife of his friend Andrew Parker Bowles, who is also a friend of mine.

My firm understanding from the Prince’s close friend, the soldier and businessman Gerald Ward (now dead), is that between 1981, when Charles and Diana married, and 1988, Charles had no affair whatever  with Camilla.

They occasionally met socially when her husband was also present and they exchanged Christmas cards, but otherwise there was no relationship.

Then, in 1988 — by which time Diana was having extra-marital affairs — Ward invited Andrew Parker Bowles to fish at Balmacneil, his house on the River Tay in Scotland, and to bring Camilla with him.

Unexpectedly and at very short notice Andrew was unable to do so and Camilla went alone. Prince Charles had also been invited to fish and it was on that occasion that his affair with Camilla was reignited — after his  marriage to Diana had irretrievably collapsed. Diana’s psychiatric  problems sometimes drove her to assault her husband and Camilla was the only person in whom he could  confide when at his wit’s end.

He also turned to her for advice and help when Diana mutilated her own arms and legs or deliberately injured herself in other ways. While Camilla avoided media attention (including from myself), declining all comment, Diana encouraged and manipulated it while blaming it for damaging  the marriage.

Few have shown more skill in  managing the media to her advantage through direct contact with selected members or through  well-briefed friends.

After Andrew and Camilla divorced, he assured me Camilla had no wish  to be Queen. Nevertheless, she was convinced that the particular emotional support she alone had been able to provide could be helpful to Charles in his future role as King.

In short, she envisaged herself in a consort role for which she is having excellent experience as Duchess of Cornwall, apparently to the great  satisfaction of the rest of the Royal Family and, perhaps even more so, of the public

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2559859/The-fishing-trip-Charles-hooked-Camilla-All-stories-betraying-Diana-start-nonsense-says-man-whos-spent-70-years-exposing-secrets.html

I didn't know where to put this so this was the safest bet  :cookie:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on February 15, 2014, 01:28:56 pm
Well, that's interesting.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on February 15, 2014, 02:38:47 pm
Quote
My firm understanding from the Prince’s close friend, the soldier and businessman Gerald Ward (now dead), is that between 1981, when Charles and Diana married, and 1988, Charles had no affair whatever 


So this is hearsay from a person that is now deceased and cannot substantiate. I wish they would stop Diana bashing to make Camilla more acceptable. You can understand why William is like he is when his late mother is continually bashed in the press.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on February 15, 2014, 04:09:04 pm
I will never get this Chuck and Di were two people who should have never married ... he cheated , she cheated I will never get why he is made out to be "the bad guy" in that mess there was no "angel" in that mess  :wopedo: ...


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 15, 2014, 06:03:33 pm
Charles had his cheating ways before he even met Diana. He came into the marriage with baggage, Diana came into it with no "past."  Ordinarily, a woman can get a divorce if she finds her husband loves somebody else (which Charles admitted to Dimblby in the book) bu tin Diana's case divorce was discouraged and if she left she had a good chance of losing custody of the boys. She sought comfort elsewhere. If Charles  went into the marriage in good faith, I doubt Diana would have looked at another man.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on February 15, 2014, 06:39:32 pm
^ Cheating is cheating period , period !!!   :wopedo:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 15, 2014, 06:45:55 pm
Diana did not have a lover watching her marry Charles. Charles had his lover watching him get married and he admitted to his biographer he preferred Camilla when he married Diana.

Diana was cast off. It's not as if she did the same thing Charles did in every sense of the word.

Had Charles been honorable I doubt she would have sought comfort elsewhere.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on February 15, 2014, 07:41:41 pm
A discussion about a long gone marriage and who was at fault seems pointless to me.  None of us know the truth - and those who have one point of view or another are not going to be persuaded otherwise.  Personally - Charles and his fascination with Camilla was deplorable but Di was no saint either.  By her own admission in the Panorama interview there was some pretty extreme stuff going on from the very beginning.  They both contributed to the demise of the marriage.  I say - let it go.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: dianab on February 15, 2014, 08:32:02 pm
^ The own friends of CHarles dont let go as this last article written proves :bored:

Quote
My firm understanding from the Prince’s close friend, the soldier and businessman Gerald Ward (now dead), is that between 1981, when Charles and Diana married, and 1988, Charles had no affair whatever  


So this is hearsay from a person that is now deceased and cannot substantiate. I wish they would stop Diana bashing to make Camilla more acceptable. You can understand why William is like he is when his late mother is continually bashed in the press.
True. IMO isnt & never was out of nothing that William is a reluctant royal (read: have profund hatred for monarchy) and he considers since his early 20s Mike M. his "Dad". For this & other things I never bought this so called hatred of William for Diana that some likes propagate/diffuse as royal sycophants (read: reporters) as posters in royal forum(s) being pro- or anti-Diana. JMO

IMO William have deep hatred in his heart for many blood relatives, particularly one living in CH. One who's well-known for his jealousy issues & probably wasnt amused with all the headlines that certain trio (K-W-H) was having in press... then now he's the boss & the trio isnt having their best days in press since certain one became the boss...


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on February 16, 2014, 08:18:34 am
A discussion about a long gone marriage and who was at fault seems pointless to me.  None of us know the truth - and those who have one point of view or another are not going to be persuaded otherwise.  Personally - Charles and his fascination with Camilla was deplorable but Di was no saint either.  By her own admission in the Panorama interview there was some pretty extreme stuff going on from the very beginning.  They both contributed to the demise of the marriage.  I say - let it go.
Exactly!!! It takes two to ruin a marriage and Di said herself he was 50% to blame ...but that won't stop some looking at her like some kind of victim of "evil" Chuck  :wopedo: ...


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on February 16, 2014, 07:47:00 pm
Prince Charles overtakes William as most popular choice for king

British people think Prince Charles should take over as king, a new poll has found.
 A survey carried out by YouGov saw 42 per cent of respondents express a wish for Queen Elizabeth (87) give up the throne in favour of her eldest son, with just 36 per cent thinking she should continue.
 
And for the first time in 10 years, Charles has overtaken his son Prince William as the popular choice to take over as head of state, winning 53 per cent of the votes, compared with the 31 per cent who opted for William.
 
This is in stark contrast to a similar survey on William’s wedding day to Duchess Catherine – formerly Kate Middleton – in 2011, when only 38 per cent were in favour of Charles as king, while 44 per cent wanted his son to take the throne.
 
Charles’ biographer, Jonathan Dimbleby commented: “Charles has not changed very much but the true Prince of Wales is being recognised by more and more people”.
http://you.co.za/news/prince-charles-overtakes-william-as-most-popular-choice-for-king/


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on February 16, 2014, 10:55:27 pm
I never understood the preference for Willy - he has zero experience compared to PC's decades of experience.  He has no real network of international contacts as compared to PC' - who must have dozens of those rolodex's filled with influential people he can call on.

What is interesting here in this poll is so many think the Queen should retire - very surprising.  I do not think she should retire - monarchy is for life. 

It seems obvious to me that PW would be a poor choice for King right now - hopefully he and his baby boy brother will mature as time goes on.  But not now - he is no way ready.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Vesper on February 16, 2014, 11:39:03 pm
William is in no way ready to be king, not when he can't even be counted on to not sabotage an important cause he wishes to promote. The event of the last weekend was the work of one that hasn't got a clue what he is doing.

I don't see why a monarch can't retire quite frankly. I think in the case of the Belgium and the Netherlands, the events of last year went on splendidly. If continuity is what the monarchy is all about, then why not let a much younger and less tired, not to mention well trained Charles take over? This idea that a monarch for life is not one I believe in because god sure didn't put them in that position. Dieu et mon droit is a thing of the past.



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on February 16, 2014, 11:47:27 pm
^LOL - what was I thinking?  You are right - it isn't for life - the Lord did not put them on the throne - so yeah - why not a retirement?  Give PC his well eared chance.



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on February 16, 2014, 11:50:45 pm
HM won't because she's a pride filled snob who would look like the world's biggest hypocrite (not that she isn't, but that is another rant for another time) since she has mouthed off in the past (said "Typical Dutch" after getting a phone call announcing Juliana's abdication in favor of Beatrix) and all her biographers have mentioned how her holy sense of holy duty won't LET her abdicate in favor of Charles.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 17, 2014, 12:21:59 am
^LOL - what was I thinking?  You are right - it isn't for life - the Lord did not put them on the throne - so yeah - why not a retirement?  Give PC his well eared chance.



The trouble is that even  in the highly unlikely event that the Queen abdicates, Charles will be expected to do the same thing down the road. IMO hell would have to freeze over before Charles would retire from the throne. If she sets a precedent IMO he will face pressure to abdicate as well.

With all the recent Diana bashing, I don't want to see him King anytime soon. He's certainly being self serving with being in charge of the media. IMO anyway.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Vesper on February 17, 2014, 12:32:08 am
^I get it that you don't like Charles, and god knows you're right about his behavior towards Diana, but the throne is not a popularity contest. If that were the case then Britain would be voting for a president right now.  Charles, whether we like him or not, will one day be king, and I think if his mother were to set a precedent, he might be inclined to do the same in due time. But we are way ahead of ourselves because I don't think the queen will retire anytime soon if ever.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 17, 2014, 12:36:44 am
Charles would never abdicate IMO and he would feel the effects of his mother (theoretically) abdicating and more pressure would be put on him to step down.

At the most he and the Queen perhaps would have regencies if either becomes incapacitated but will not give up the throne. I think Charles would fight against a Regency but it would be the lesser of two evils--I doubt he'd want to retire. He even said publicly that he had a lot to do in his life. He won't leave the throne without a fight IMO anyway.

It is known he will be King if he does not predecease the Queen.

I think WIlliam would not step down because he would love the perks and the bowing and scraping but do little work.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on February 17, 2014, 12:45:18 am
The Queen and Charles will never abdicate. NEVER. Charles, regardless, of the terribly unfortunate Diana situation will be a great king. William, on the other hand, should never be invested because he will be a monumental nightmare as a monarch. Awful. Disaster.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 17, 2014, 12:48:38 am
I'm not so sure Charles will be a great king. If he doesn't let his ego get in the way and also stops the usual interfering he does (it could be a hard habit to break) and doesn't put Camilla front and center, it would be a good thing. He needs to keep his head down and work and also think of the next generation and try the best he can now with William.

William I think will enjoy the perks and titles and will do the minimum work. He is going on 32 now and he still has not grown up.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Vesper on February 17, 2014, 12:51:45 am
Charles would never abdicate IMO and he would feel the effects of his mother (theoretically) abdicating and more pressure would be put on him to step down.

That's a good point, especially when you consider how long he waited for the role so he may not feel that he had enough time before he would have to step down.

I think WIlliam would not step down because he would love the perks and the bowing and scraping but do little work.

William's work portfolio at the age of almost 32 is an embarrassment.



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on February 17, 2014, 05:07:15 am
what work portfolio?  Compare him to what PC had done at this age and Willie really looks bad - but it is in part PC's fault too - he let his sons have this protracted adolescence - and now they are still unaccomplished , entitled bratty kids - Harry not quite so bad as Will - but closing in


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on February 17, 2014, 09:26:30 am
Prince Charles overtakes William as most popular choice for king

British people think Prince Charles should take over as king, a new poll has found.
 A survey carried out by YouGov saw 42 per cent of respondents express a wish for Queen Elizabeth (87) give up the throne in favour of her eldest son, with just 36 per cent thinking she should continue.
 
And for the first time in 10 years, Charles has overtaken his son Prince William as the popular choice to take over as head of state, winning 53 per cent of the votes, compared with the 31 per cent who opted for William.
 
This is in stark contrast to a similar survey on William’s wedding day to Duchess Catherine – formerly Kate Middleton – in 2011, when only 38 per cent were in favour of Charles as king, while 44 per cent wanted his son to take the throne.
 
Charles’ biographer, Jonathan Dimbleby commented: “Charles has not changed very much but the true Prince of Wales is being recognised by more and more people”.
http://you.co.za/news/prince-charles-overtakes-william-as-most-popular-choice-for-king/
GO Chuck !!!  :bouncy:  :loveshower:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Vesper on February 17, 2014, 02:41:58 pm
what work portfolio?  Compare him to what PC had done at this age and Willie really looks bad - but it is in part PC's fault too - he let his sons have this protracted adolescence - and now they are still unaccomplished , entitled bratty kids - Harry not quite so bad as Will - but closing in

Yes, what was I thinking. He hardly worked let alone a having portfolio. I think part of the reason that Charles let them run a muck all these years is because he feels guilty about the mess he made of their family life. It was even worse after their mother's passing, he should have kept on top of their education and development, but he let them do whatever they felt like doing.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on February 17, 2014, 03:24:05 pm
Prince Charles overtakes William as most popular choice for king

British people think Prince Charles should take over as king, a new poll has found.
 A survey carried out by YouGov saw 42 per cent of respondents express a wish for Queen Elizabeth (87) give up the throne in favour of her eldest son, with just 36 per cent thinking she should continue.
 
And for the first time in 10 years, Charles has overtaken his son Prince William as the popular choice to take over as head of state, winning 53 per cent of the votes, compared with the 31 per cent who opted for William.
 
This is in stark contrast to a similar survey on William’s wedding day to Duchess Catherine – formerly Kate Middleton – in 2011, when only 38 per cent were in favour of Charles as king, while 44 per cent wanted his son to take the throne.
 
Charles’ biographer, Jonathan Dimbleby commented: “Charles has not changed very much but the true Prince of Wales is being recognised by more and more people”.
http://you.co.za/news/prince-charles-overtakes-william-as-most-popular-choice-for-king/

I guess Charles controlling all the PR coming from the palace is working out for him and Camilla. C&C are looking like the only alternative and William and Harry can't get a good PR story no matter what they try.

Charles has always been a bad Father because just like William he is to selfish to be a good parent.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 17, 2014, 09:45:53 pm
The trouble with Charles and WIlliam is they perhaps felt of producing an heir not being a father to the child and trying to be a good father. Charles actually seemed better when his children were infants. Charles never grumbled about the boys when they were babies. William was all upset about the crying of George and whinged over it. Not like a Dad proudly showing photos of the kids. I do think Charles and WIlliam are self centered and though they love their children they both think of themselves first.  I don't see C and C as "better than" William but William is very disappointing and it's too bad that after the Queen the future does not look bright. Maybe it's up to George down the road.

Charles should have paid a lot of attention to what the boys were doing after their mother died. He spent much time on Camilla and that could have waited since he had no need of producing an heir anymore.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on February 18, 2014, 12:16:51 am
what work portfolio?  Compare him to what PC had done at this age and Willie really looks bad - but it is in part PC's fault too - he let his sons have this protracted adolescence - and now they are still unaccomplished, entitled bratty kids - Harry not quite so bad as Will - but closing in
Yes, what was I thinking. He hardly worked let alone a having portfolio. I think part of the reason that Charles let them run a muck all these years is because he feels guilty about the mess he made of their family life. It was even worse after their mother's passing, he should have kept on top of their education and development, but he let them do whatever they felt like doing.

Too bad both idiots were never made aware that they aren't the only ones with broken homes, divorced parents, and messed up family dynamics. At least both princes had a dad who brought home enough to put then inside nurseries inside a palace and had their needs attended to. It's not like either one suffered hunger or neglect or homelessness. It's not like either had to really deal with the disadvantages of being young men in this economy or face censure for half the stuff they've pulled on other people.

Thing is, that neither spoiled brat was trained the way Charles was; Charles was trained ot be and accept that he was different and to focus on his work with lovers as a side amusement. Charles was brought up to appreciate his heritage and appreciate all he has, whihc has ensured that he has been one of the most successful Princes of Wales.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 18, 2014, 02:01:57 am
Diana was also quoted in various interviews at wanting William to be aware of his heritage and for Harry to be his support. She wanted him to see how the other half lives too but not in the way William especially distorted her teachings. He thinks he can be "average" which means do little work and grab all the perks, hide out his heir and have him rarely be seen so he can be "normal" too. IMO Diana would be shocked at how he turned out. Charles was raised to be well aware of his heritage but unfortunately cocooned William and encouraged the hiding out and he spoiled him. Though Charles complained about his upbringing, after his time away at the school he loathed, he was sent to Australia for a time and he enjoyed that time away and he enjoyed his Uni years. He also did many royal duties. William needed a firmer hand and limits should have been given him and his father should have required him to work for a charity and oversee it and work for it and expect results from WIlliam. Same with Harry.

William is not proactive and cherrypicks his assignments and "work" like holding a "Fun" sporting event inviting sports figures and partying with them. Also, being an advocate for conservation involves going to stay with Jecca at her family estate.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on February 18, 2014, 02:34:46 am
^exactly - these two were raised differently than other royal kids - Diana wanted them to understand "typical" people and have typical experiences - but she always understood she was a Princess and did not act out some kind of normal fantasy - she would never be so condescending.   Harry and Will were not raised in a palace like PC - they were raised in affluent Gloucestershire among the rich set - and they think that is what "normal" is.  They think being royal is just a job they can put on and off like a jacket.  They do not appreciate that heritage nor do they really identify as being "royal" - Harry doesn't even want to be called a Prince.  They resent their status -

I do not think Harry and Will really feel comfortable among "typical" or normal people - they can feel comfortable around soldiers - but otherwise - normal to them is their rich set - the glossy posse.

PC never set limits for these two - he just did not invest enough in teaching them.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on February 18, 2014, 02:50:00 am
Thing is, Charles never made them do appearances as frequently as they should have; Charles should have told them to get over the press involvement in their lives and understand that there wasn't just the press hassling Diana, there was also the fact that the driver was speeding like crazy and they hit a pillar.

Charles should have made them work and told them to stop being a brat about the media involvement. Charles protected them way too much. Once William turned eighteen, Charles should have ordered that William start performing a regular program of appearances and when he's not in school, he has to be participating in royal ceremonial.

It's been a lack of training, not a lack of work or too many vacations.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: RoyalWatcher on February 18, 2014, 03:22:13 am
When exactly will Chuck's friends let his previous marriage go without trying to rehab his image?  We know that chuck committed adultery while married, that he preferred his married lover over his wife, that he refused to have a third child with his wife, and that he's a selfish bore.

Diana cannot defend herself.  And it just makes Chuck and his supporters look spiteful and mean.  Had I been HM, Chuck would have been given a choice...Camilla or the throne.  But you don't get both.  But then, I'm a strong woman and HM is not. 

Chuck, like his mother and father, was a neglectful parent.  Out of sight, out of mind.  His children were treated as duties and not children.  I don't really see any love between him and his sons:  they are only here because he felt it was his "duty" to sire an heir (Willy) and the spare (Harry.)  Kids aren't stupid and I'm sure that his offspring picked up on it.  No wonder that there isn't that much photographic interaction between the trio.



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on February 18, 2014, 04:45:03 am
I wonder how Charles' friends really feel about Diana being slandered; they might be his toadies, but they are surely aware that it could have easily been one of their sisters, cousins, etc. who is now dead in a grave and now regularly slandered by Charles and usurped by Camilla. Camilla set the stage for Kate, if there hadn't been a Camilla as Consort, Kate would in no way be William's wife.

HM is the weakest monarch in British history.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: terrajoule on February 18, 2014, 04:48:04 am
^exactly - these two were raised differently than other royal kids - Diana wanted them to understand "typical" people and have typical experiences - but she always understood she was a Princess and did not act out some kind of normal fantasy - she would never be so condescending.   Harry and Will were not raised in a palace like PC - they were raised in affluent Gloucestershire among the rich set - and they think that is what "normal" is.  They think being royal is just a job they can put on and off like a jacket.  They do not appreciate that heritage nor do they really identify as being "royal" - Harry doesn't even want to be called a Prince.  They resent their status -

I do not think Harry and Will really feel comfortable among "typical" or normal people - they can feel comfortable around soldiers - but otherwise - normal to them is their rich set - the glossy posse.

PC never set limits for these two - he just did not invest enough in teaching them.

 :goodpost:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on February 18, 2014, 06:53:20 am
You are on it KF !!!!!!! ^^^^^^


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on February 21, 2014, 01:11:50 pm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/10447867/Prince-Charles-at-65-Ten-things-one-can-learn-from-the-heir-to-the-throne.html

Quote
To the outside world, the Royal lot appears to be a peculiar mix of ceremony, travel and photo opportunities.

Prince Charles has not always enjoyed his time in the spotlight, but during his 65 years he has learnt to cope admirably with the unusual situations in which he finds himself.

From his investiture as the Prince of Wales in 1969, sharing his thoughts on architecture and climate change, through to reading the weather forecast and lots and lots of dancing, the Prince is not easily flapped.

So what can we learn from Prince Charles and his 65 years? Watch the video and.  find out


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on February 22, 2014, 10:46:13 am
You know, someone should tell Charles that he isn't the only one doing what he does. CEOs do it all the time along with politicians. They don't whine though.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 05, 2014, 11:29:46 pm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2573436/SEBASTIAN-SHAKESPEARE-After-1m-palace-refit-Kate-hates-colour-scheme.html

Quote
Step aside now, peer tells Charles

Off with his head. Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, whose grandfather negotiated the abdication of Edward VIII, has called for Prince Charles to renounce his claim to the Throne in favour of Prince William. 

Christopher Monckton, once an adviser to Mrs Thatcher but now a member of UKIP, objects to Prince Charles describing climate change deniers as ‘headless chickens’.

‘Your Royal Highness . . . next time you talk to the plants, ask them whether they would like more CO2 in the air they breathe. Their answer will be Yes . . .’ writes Lord Monckton to Clarence House.

Monckton — whose sister Rosa Monckton was Princess Diana’s best friend — calls on Charles to take part in a public debate. Fat chance, I’d say.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 06, 2014, 07:33:28 am
You know, considering Charles' fixation with money, he must be screaming the roof down about Kate's delusion of outfitting KP yet again and I think that times like this Camilla is definitely earning every pence that Charles gives her to spend. He HAS to be ranting and raving about all of Kate's spending and other antics. As for the Aussie/NZ trip, I am certain that he's upset beyond all measure. Charles had manners drilled into him at an early age and he's almost NEVER put a foot wrong.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 06, 2014, 09:08:16 pm
Bur why was Kate allowed to idle away? The royals generally don't let senior royals get away with this sort of thing. What makes Kate so 'fragile" and "special." Does Will have temper tantrums if crossed? I am not getting this.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on March 06, 2014, 09:57:17 pm
It is very strange that Waity does seem to be treated as fragile and delicate, neither of which she is in the least.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on March 06, 2014, 10:29:42 pm
Willy must be having screaming fits about his darling precious being too special and therefore should not do anything but what he wants her to do.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on March 07, 2014, 03:24:05 am
I would not worry too much about the cost of re painting the kitchen at KP - because compared to shutting down an entire resort - 45 villas - so Willy the loon and his darling bride Kate can have privacy - that is a cost I would worry about.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 07, 2014, 08:43:14 am
Once Charles gets that bill I'm dead sure that he'll be torching Kate's wardrobe after his staff notifies the stores to bill the duchess directly and the courtiers cancel the credit cards and HM/Philip hammer out a separation agreement. There is no way that they can get away with this. First the Maori king is offended and now this extravagance.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on March 07, 2014, 09:59:41 am
I mean is the Woo Woo and The Stalker so arrogant and so out of touch with reality? I cannot believe that they are this stupid. Something really must be done about them. Sooner rather than later. They almost sound like they are insane. I'm not kidding either.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 07, 2014, 10:12:35 am
I think William has had his break with reality a long time ago and Kate is making sure he stays crazy, lest he wise up and set her straight along with her crazy family. Charles has no clue what to do since he's not making hsi sons move on beyond losing Diana (something that happened almost twenty years ago) and he (Charles) has no moral credibility.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 07, 2014, 10:47:58 am
I would not worry too much about the cost of re painting the kitchen at KP - because compared to shutting down an entire resort - 45 villas - so Willy the loon and his darling bride Kate can have privacy - that is a cost I would worry about.

Richard Palmer ‏@RoyalReporter 31m

Quote
Mike and Carole Middleton are looking after Prince George while his parents stay at the Cheval Blanc Randheli, Noonu Atoll, friends confirm.
Last night staff at William and Kate's hotel denied the couple were there. Other guests are staying there as well as the couple, I'm told.

 :dontknow:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on March 08, 2014, 12:58:46 am
Billionairess who splashed out £500,000 for Prince Charles' 65th birthday party faces £350million fraud probe

 Priya Hiranandani-Vandrevala sat with Charles at Buckingham Palace party

 She and her husband have also paid a record £7,000 for a chocolate egg
 Court in Isle of Man is due to hear case over 'missing' £350million
 It was given to company she headed by London investors including HSBC
 The socialite, aged 37, denies claims of 'fraudulent misrepresentation'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2575978/Billionairess-splashed-500-000-Prince-Charles-65th-birthday-party-faces-350million-fraud-probe.html




Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 08, 2014, 01:44:02 am
I think William has had his break with reality a long time ago and Kate is making sure he stays crazy, lest he wise up and set her straight along with her crazy family. Charles has no clue what to do since he's not making hsi sons move on beyond losing Diana (something that happened almost twenty years ago) and he (Charles) has no moral credibility.

Charles dumped Diana years and years ago and is in know position to dictate how his sons should feel about their mother. Diana is not to blame for this mess--William is stubborn and arrogant and he apparently is allowed to do whatever he wants and thumb his nose at the public. Kate is his enabler. Charles can't "make" his sons do anything.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Sparky on March 08, 2014, 02:04:49 am
Billionairess who splashed out £500,000 for Prince Charles' 65th birthday party faces £350million fraud probe

 Priya Hiranandani-Vandrevala sat with Charles at Buckingham Palace party

 She and her husband have also paid a record £7,000 for a chocolate egg
 Court in Isle of Man is due to hear case over 'missing' £350million
 It was given to company she headed by London investors including HSBC
 The socialite, aged 37, denies claims of 'fraudulent misrepresentation'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2575978/Billionairess-splashed-500-000-Prince-Charles-65th-birthday-party-faces-350million-fraud-probe.html


 bignono What is it with royals accepting $$$$$$$$ to throw themselves or get someone else to throw them lavish parties (who obviously expect connections and other things in return) and it is not just the British royal family.... It's so shameless and reveals their self-entitlement, I guess living off the teat of the taxpayer does that to most royals.





Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on March 08, 2014, 03:48:52 am
so it seems this is where the darlings are staying 

http://www.travelplusstyle.com/magazine/cheval-blanc-randheli-resort-is-maldives-newest-a-listerhttp://

so - the report that they were satying at a 45 villa resort that had to shut down may not be true and they may be at this place -


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on March 08, 2014, 04:29:30 am
^
Another thing that we forget is that they have got their own country retreat. If they want to go away then why not go to Norfolk and take George with them.

I can see places like Balmoral, Sandringham and Windsor will eventually be lost as William and Kate will have no interest in them. Kate will either be in London or in Mustique or somewhere similar. These country homes keep local people in work and give the Royals some privacy and security. Kate and William don't seem very bothered about holidaying in the UK even though they have the sort of holiday home close to the sea that most people would die for.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 08, 2014, 05:06:52 am
Any bets that WK will sell them to the Beckhams?

Charles must be up in arms that his sons are going to destroy every single thing he has worked so hard and sacrificed a lot for.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on March 08, 2014, 05:06:36 pm
Then he should have spent more time with his sons than promoting Cammie and forcing her down their throats. Hindsight is wonderful.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 08, 2014, 06:00:32 pm
William and Harry are old enough to know better and behave better.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 12, 2014, 07:10:02 pm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2579184/Royals-wrap-races-Zara-Phillips-Princess-Anne-Camilla-flutter-Cheltenham-Ladies-Day.html

Quote
Camilla gets lucky at Ladies Day! Duchess of Cornwall backs a winner at Cheltenham on day two of the festival

    Duchess of Cornwall was accompanied by her son Tom Parker-Bowles
    The pair watched the action from the Royal Box
    Zara Phillips, Princess Anne and Autumn Phillips watched separately
    All the royal women wrapped up in long coats and knee-high boots


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 12, 2014, 07:14:45 pm
Camilla should not act "cute" and mug for those cameras. She calls attention to her mouth which is really not attractive. She loves those cameras.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 12, 2014, 07:19:09 pm
Craig Hope ‏@CraigHope01 3h
Quote
Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall just seconds before she was pulled out of the way of a parading horse! pic.twitter.com/6WEjbfWniJ

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Biib5BJIgAAPFDZ.jpg

Victoria Murphy ‏@QueenVicMirror 1h
Quote
Prince Charles joked today he was taking lessons in "grandfatherhood", adding "I know when something needs a bottle"
When a tiny baby cried during Prince Charles' speech:"I think it's time to give it a bottle...I've been taking lessons in grandfatherhood"


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 12, 2014, 07:38:26 pm
Camilla gawks at the cameras so she doesn't know where she is going.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 13, 2014, 12:58:54 pm
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/westminster-abbey-memorial-service-sir-david-frost

Quote
The Prince of Wales was among more than 2,000 people paying tribute to late broadcaster Sir David Frost at a service in Westminster Abbey.
 
They were being joined by famous faces from the worlds of politics and showbusiness including Sir Michael Parkinson, Lord Owen and Joanna Lumley.
 
Other royal guests invited to the memorial service included the Countess of Wessex, the Duke of York and his daughter Princess Beatrice.
 
Charles was joined by Sir David's widow, Lady Carina Fitzalan-Howard, to lay flowers on a memorial stone dedicated to the broadcaster who died last August aged 74.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on March 13, 2014, 02:22:52 pm
The royals will only allow public scrutiny when it serves the family's interests
Although the Guardian has won the right to see Prince Charles's letters, we may still never know what is in them


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/13/royals-public-scrutiny-prince-charles-letters?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on March 13, 2014, 07:15:28 pm
another damning article incited by the Maldives trip - they really are on a roll.  That was a very good article - well written.  And it is inescapable that what the author says is true - they live very very well and yes - they then pretend to be victims poor darlings of the press.

Everyone should read this article.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on March 13, 2014, 10:29:47 pm
Victoria Murphy ‏@QueenVicMirror 1h
Quote
Prince Charles joked today he was taking lessons in "grandfatherhood", adding "I know when something needs a bottle"
When a tiny baby cried during Prince Charles' speech:"I think it's time to give it a bottle...I've been taking lessons in grandfatherhood"

How vomit inducing  :ick:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 14, 2014, 12:28:52 am
I don't think Charles goes near bottles and diapers involving George. There are "people" to do that.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on March 14, 2014, 02:21:53 am
Probably the only bottles Chucky goes near are the ones Cammie wants.  :tehe:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on March 14, 2014, 01:25:45 pm
The royals will only allow public scrutiny when it serves the family's interests
Although the Guardian has won the right to see Prince Charles's letters, we may still never know what is in them


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/13/royals-public-scrutiny-prince-charles-letters?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter



Excellent article, thanks for posting.  The lamebridges are a Republican dream, big time.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 15, 2014, 08:08:53 am
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2581312/Prince-Charles-tells-Glaswegian-stand-understand-Scots-theyve-couple-drinks.html
Quote
Of all the Royals, it's Prince Philip who is famous for his often questionable sense of humour.

But, proving his father's not the only one in the family who is fond of a dodgy jape, Prince Charles joked about struggling to understand Scottish people when they've been drinking.

Speaking with a Glaswegian comic at the annual Prince's Trust Awards in central London, Charles joked he couldn't understand a Scot once they've consumed a 'couple of drinks'.

After stand-up comedian Des Clarke told him where he was from, the Prince said: 'I know, I can tell by your accent.'

Mr Clarke then asked him if he was ok with the accent, to which the heir responded: 'Oh yes, fantastic. Until you've had a couple of drinks.

'I'll make sure that I don't speak to you after five o'clock.'


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Snokitty on March 17, 2014, 02:41:34 pm
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/royals-to-attend-edible-garden-show-at-alexandra-palace-9196770.html


Quote
The Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall are to visit The Edible Garden Show, which opens at Alexandra Palace next week.

The event promotes growing your own fruit and vegetables and also encourages healthy eating.

The royal couple are due to tour the exhibition and meet young people who have been taking part in a national schools’ initiative to design a “dream edible garden”. The event also encourages and advises visitors on how to keep bees and on brewing beer.

The One Show’s gardening expert Christine Walkden will give daily talks, with advice about growing food products. TV chef Phil Vickery will give a cooking demonstration. The Edible Garden Show was launched in 2011 to meet demand for information on home-grown produce and healthy eating. It runs over three days from March 28-30.

For more details visit www.theediblegardenshow.co.uk

Looking at a Garden!   Oh yes they all work way to hard for a normal human.    :laugh:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 27, 2014, 04:12:11 am
This is just a thought, but maybe Charles' control of the offices of Harry and William is a way to stop making him catch his kids all the time? Instead of protecting them from their mistakes and hiding it from the press/world, maybe the new strategy is to make them stand on their own two feet. Instead of the palace doing all the commenting and then being made to look like fools ("no chance of a marriage between Kate and William" only later on to hear the engagement announcement) and Charles is ordering the press office to stop working all night on persecuting the press via lawsuits and other constant expenses.

I have noticed that since Charles took over, there haven't been a lot of comments from the palace directly in response to the recent antics of the princes and this recent announcement that the palace is no longer allowing free legal help is telling. I think Charles is making the princes accept consequences to their actions now.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 28, 2014, 12:33:58 am
Charles IMO is not doing anything, just same as before.

He and his mother could order the lazy trio to get to work, give them a full plate of duties, stop coddling them and no vacations unless they do a certain quota of work.

All Charles cares about his himself and selling the controversial Camilla to the public.



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on April 11, 2014, 02:42:48 pm
An Englishman's home AND his castle! Beautiful Cornish manor house that's owned by Prince Charles and comes with its own keep is yours for £850,000 (but you only get to keep it for 20 years)
Trematon Castle, near Saltash in Cornwall, was built after William the Conqueror invaded in 1066
Joint package including the castle, a nine-bedroom manor house, a separate lodge and acres of gardens is on sale
The property is owned by the Duchy of Cornwall, the estate belonging to Prince Charles
The property is not available to be bought outright, but will have a 20-year lease attached, which can be renewed
According to estate agents Knight Frank, the property would cost £3million if it were on sale in the normal way


They say an Englishman's home is his castle, but with this property you get two for the price of one.
An enormous manor house which has an ancient castle sitting in the back garden has gone on the market for £850,000.
The historic Trematon Castle was built shortly after the Norman Conquest in the 11th century by Robert, Count of Mortain.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2602341/An-Englishmans-home-AND-castle-Beautiful-Cornish-manor-house-comes-just-850-000.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on April 11, 2014, 04:18:13 pm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2602087/So-King-Charles-III-deposed-scheming-Kate-Box-office-mischief-certainly-But-controversial-new-play-gives-food-thought.html

New play about Charles 111 and how Kate plots to depose him.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on April 11, 2014, 11:37:42 pm
That could be your future Charlie Boy.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on April 12, 2014, 06:04:05 am
Kate might finally make herself very popular - LOL


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on April 12, 2014, 07:31:51 am
Although the play is a send up there is a darker element. Charles could bring the Monarchy down by his meddling in politics. If he starts interfering when he becomes king then will have a scenario where the unelected Head of State is trying to influence the elected government. That cannot happen. It's a bit of an oxymoron for someone like Charles who has quite strong views on certain issues. He does not want to be irrelevant but he is not elected to speak on behalf on the electorate.

Thing you have to ask how relevant the RF are in the 21st century. They must realise that they are not very relevant themselves. They are really just ambassadors in a ceremonial role. I see their position as quite tenuous in today's British society and very tenuous in the Commonwealth countries.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on April 12, 2014, 08:13:16 am
^ I think it is his egotism but I also think he does genuinely care about correc5ing wrongs as he sees them.

I do agree the monarchy hardly seems relevant to a commonwealth country especially those so far from the UK - but there is an important role I believe for it in the UK although it must be scaled back - they must conduct themselves ethically -


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Jane23 on April 12, 2014, 08:46:59 am
Isn't the play treason by definition? Imagining Liz's death is a no , no ... they are lucky the don't live in  Harry VIII times ...


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on April 12, 2014, 09:16:04 am
^
I like the bit where Kate starts showing her true colours and uses the "f" word.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on April 12, 2014, 09:40:17 am
^ I think it is his egotism but I also think he does genuinely care about correc5ing wrongs as he sees them.

I do agree the monarchy hardly seems relevant to a commonwealth country especially those so far from the UK - but there is an important role I believe for it in the UK although it must be scaled back - they must conduct themselves ethically -

If they start losing the Commonwealth countries which is inevitable then they will naturally have to scale back. Like natural wastage for want of a better expression. They will not be doing the Commonwealth tours so will have to find something purposeful to do with their time. Interesting times to come.

I have in the past preferred our system of a separate Head of State. I don't like to see them acting like celebrities, overspending or indulging in a hedonistic lifestyle though.

If one Commonwealth country becomes a republic it is likely to start a chain reaction with others. If the first one to become a republic choses a charismatic leader with gravitas then that could encourage the others. On the other hand if the chosen Head of State does not cut it then some countries may stay with the RF.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Stephanie on April 23, 2014, 06:05:02 pm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2611390/Camillas-brother-Mark-Shand-fighting-life-hospital-hitting-head-outside-NY-nightclub.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on April 23, 2014, 07:01:42 pm
 RIP Mark Shand.  :bye:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: kolkomilko on October 30, 2014, 08:30:57 am
I wonder who are more popular recently: Charles and Camilla or Waity and Wills? What do you think?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Val on October 30, 2014, 04:09:33 pm
No contest, Charles and Camilla.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on October 30, 2014, 11:24:20 pm
Cambs.

Watch the wedding. And compare how differently C&C are received to the rest of the RF. They are even uncomfortable.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Val on November 01, 2014, 08:12:15 pm
As Sarah says - no way!

http://www.bayoubuzz.com/buzz/item/773708-hillary-clinton-is-ruthless-andy-griffith-is-dead-but-camilla-on-cocaine-no-way


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on November 01, 2014, 08:50:19 pm
Alexandrine - you mean the W and K wedding?  I thought Camilla looked very distressed during the wedding - even on the verge of tears -


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 01, 2014, 09:11:44 pm
Camilla looked like she was living in fear; she was looking around looking genuinely afraid. Might be the first time she's shown fear in public.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on November 01, 2014, 09:45:48 pm
perhaps there was some sort of threat made from a disgruntled person?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Mandosiel on November 02, 2014, 03:55:54 am
I'm not surprised if there was, I'm sure there was strong protests and threats made by certain people that never reached the ears of the public but the royals were made aware of, there's all sorts of extremists.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on November 02, 2014, 11:29:48 pm
of course they receive threats but if they did it was for all the family and no one except them had that awkward air and that doesn't change the reception they got from the public


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Mandosiel on November 03, 2014, 12:05:49 am
The whole thing was just bizarro, there's so many things in that wedding that were just off. From the RF behavior to the decorations, guests, the list is endless. I will say this that a wedding and choices made therein usually reflects the couple and who they are. With as many inconsistencies and strangeness going on that day, even to the strange choice in date of wedding, what does it say about Wimpo and Waity?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Freya on November 03, 2014, 12:16:51 am
From memory I thought that Camilla was booed when she arrived at the wedding. I also thought that the Queen was a bit cold with her when Camilla greeted her upon arrival.



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on November 03, 2014, 01:15:18 am
definitely thought the Queen was cold - even annoyed - did not know about boos -


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 03, 2014, 07:25:21 am
I am amazed that the Queen kind of shoved Camilla away and yes, HM did look like she was smiling somewhat like a manic person and her eyes were LOADED with tears.

perhaps there was some sort of threat made from a disgruntled person?

I mean, literally LOOK at Camilla's face while the singing was going on. She was looking around like she was ready to run at the first sign of some maniac leaping out.

The whole thing was just bizarro, there's so many things in that wedding that were just off. From the RF behavior to the decorations, guests, the list is endless. I will say this that a wedding and choices made therein usually reflects the couple and who they are. With as many inconsistencies and strangeness going on that day, even to the strange choice in date of wedding, what does it say about Wimpo and Waity?

It was like a psychotic funhouse version of a royal wedding. Right along with the low neckline wedding dress.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 03, 2014, 06:59:44 pm
I read Camilla was acting like the groom's "mother" working the crowds the night before the wedding. I think that irritated the Queen.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Val on November 21, 2014, 08:58:54 am
Comment on the article in the DM today


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2842903/Social-media-not-forte-admits-Prince-Charles-goes-online-chat-public-presenter-Alex-Jones.html

'That was predicted to come out the day after world wide comments that the RF are never seen with George.  Insiders say that the baby was 'plonked' in to Pc's  arms to negate the strong surrogacy rumours.   The fact that it has never been seen before says everything.   So many leaks coming from the palaces now!'


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on November 21, 2014, 04:26:41 pm
Well, it is so obvious the official photographer was not responsible for it  :laugh:  Looks like a pa medd production.  Methinks ma got pa at the ready with the iPhone ( another other freebie they thought they were entitled to ), ma took sprog, shoved him into chucky´s arms and pa medd productions did a quick click.  Poor guy, he looks as though he is holding a time bomb waing to explode, which in effect is the truth.

They make themselves look even more ridiculous doing that, and no doubt it stems from ma as opposed to BP. As much as I have zero respect for the rf I seriously cannot see them lowering themselves enough to put a grainy, blurred fifth rate photo out into the public domain  -  think first "official" photo of lazy duo and sprog, that was dark and awful, which is what makes me think this is a pa medd productions effort as well, same MO, good to notice he has not been wasting money on a decent camera  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Val on December 13, 2014, 08:55:10 am
Like willy, Chaz just doesn't have 'it' and the more he tries the more foolish he looks.  What the idiotic RF don't  realise is that once the magic and mystery have gone they are finished.  The public want a King they can respect, not a prize twat, cavorting around like the village idiot and with juvenile PR's spewing  transparent rubbish.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Rosella on December 28, 2014, 10:42:27 am
I suppose Sandringham estate will be organically farmed now Charles is taking over. According to the Daily Fail it has got beyond PP and so Charles has been quietly taking over in the past couple of months.

It will be interesting to see if William helps Charles out with managing both the Duchy and Sandringham estates Charles is a very busy man and after all he is  actually going to live at Anmer, by all accounts.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Miss Hathaway on December 28, 2014, 12:07:56 pm
From memory I thought that Camilla was booed when she arrived at the wedding. I also thought that the Queen was a bit cold with her when Camilla greeted her upon arrival.


Camilla WAS booed when she arrived at the wedding.  And the queen ignored her and moved past her to greet/kiss Charles when she arrived at the Abbey, and Charles was very snappish toward Camilla.  It was all very odd.  Camilla seemed quite distressed and nervous.       :-


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on December 28, 2014, 01:06:38 pm
Throughout the entire church service Camilla did seem upset, she looked up at the camera once while she was looking around and she looked like tears were filling her eyes.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on December 28, 2014, 05:55:09 pm
I don't feel sorry for her. Never will.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: cate1949 on December 28, 2014, 08:44:14 pm
the pic is grainy because it is a screen capture from the internet

Saw your comment Val on the DM- guess they aren't censoring anymore

PC seems always so eccentric - like a doddering older Uncle - loveable but still odd duck


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on December 29, 2014, 12:35:22 am
 I Don't see anything loveable about Charles.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Val on December 29, 2014, 09:29:05 am
Bit confused here Cate, assume you meant my comment in the DM on another thread as don't comment under Val in the DM and only use Val here as it was the name of a beautiful wise old owl who lived in my clock tower.  Thanks anyway.  Must put up as a pic but not very good at the techie part.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on December 30, 2014, 11:40:08 am
^ Maybe cate1949 read a comment on DM comments section from someone named Val and assumed it was you, maybe this is where the confusion has come from.  I love the name Val for an owl, just seems to suit somehow.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Val on December 30, 2014, 01:40:37 pm
Val a gorgeous owl, will put up an Instagram sometime.  She had 2 siblings and the three used to appear at 9 pm every night and watch us in the garden.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Rosella on March 27, 2015, 01:52:41 pm
Interesting photo next to Charles.

http://earthhour.wwf.org.uk/hrh-the-prince-of-wales-supports-earth-hour-uk-2015/#.VRVdzRhXerV


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on March 27, 2015, 08:29:36 pm
The pic looks photoshopped.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Stephanie on March 29, 2015, 11:04:43 am
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3016115/The-Desecration-Devon-Duchess-Cornwall-s-son-law-just-built-50-acre-solar-farm-green-levies-power-bills-paying-430-000-year.html :ick: :stop:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on March 29, 2015, 04:27:48 pm
^^ Yup, agree there. These days I think they must have their own photoshopper on the payroll, sure looks like that to me.  Too much photoshopping cropping up.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 29, 2015, 09:00:27 pm
The step son in law also rises.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on March 31, 2015, 11:00:49 am
So, first we have this

http://earthhour.wwf.org.uk/hrh-the-prince-of-wales-supports-earth-hour-uk-2015/#.VRVdzRhXerV

And now we have this  -  he is such a hypocrite and so selfish and self centred  -  don´t do as I do, do as I say.

Prince Charles makes 80-mile trip by private helicopter - two days after urging the public to save energy

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-charles-makes-80-mile-trip-5431259


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 31, 2015, 03:23:09 pm
Doesn't look great for the future of the monarchy. Hypocritical Charles and Dilettante William who is getting paternity leave (for what) and playing at being normal again.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on March 31, 2015, 04:44:20 pm
The step son in law also rises.

Underwear model to solar entrepreneur is no small step.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on March 31, 2015, 05:33:00 pm
Thanks to his "royal" connections.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on March 31, 2015, 07:26:54 pm
Must be nice.  :bat:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Creepy on April 15, 2015, 08:38:17 pm
I'm sorry, but I thing this belongs in Charles´s section but what is this about? It shows as an msn news from the Globe every time I log out my e-mail

http://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/2014/kate-middleton-demands-prince-william-dna-test-princess-diana-secret-daughter-sarah-throne-risk/


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Liquorice on April 18, 2015, 06:09:24 pm
Is it a spoof ? How on earth could Diana have a secret baby ?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Sheridan_is_appalled on April 18, 2015, 06:26:50 pm
I find it highly unlikely that C&D had a secret baby.  Diana was in the public eye constantly, surely someone would have noticed if she were pregnant.  She also didn't "disappear" long enough for this to happen.
However, if some said that Charles and Camilla had a secret child, I can see how that would be more believable.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Liquorice on April 19, 2015, 10:20:02 am
That would be a situation the total opposite of what we know. :devil:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on May 19, 2015, 02:26:41 pm
The British royal family is an age-old institution held in high esteem throughout much of the world. With a cuddly, unassuming old lady as their figurehead, the royals have clung to power for decades.

Now though, with the all too real prospect of King Charles III looming on the horizon, should we be worried that this family of patronising, privileged elitists has too much power?

http://www.konbini.com/en/lifestyle/topic_society/politics/down-with-the-monarchy/


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on May 19, 2015, 05:08:47 pm
I think using privilege and power is a kind of catch-22 when castigating someone; the thing is that Charles is setting an example for his son to interfere. If Charles gets away with it, William will think he's justified in getting away with meddling.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on May 19, 2015, 05:46:03 pm
Willy thinks he is justified in getting away with anything he wants. He makes no pretenses.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Fly on the wall on May 26, 2015, 05:05:16 am
Prince William and Kate's Wedding Car Is 'Selfie' Magnet as Prince Charles Takes It Out for a Spin
http://www.people.com/article/prince-charles-prince-william-kate-wedding-car


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: kolkomilko on June 01, 2015, 05:01:08 pm
 Charles is in Transylvania today. He visited his cottage in Zalanpatak. Local people greeted him.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on June 02, 2015, 10:29:37 pm
He must spend lots of time there without many people knowing


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: FortressODaveBarry on June 09, 2015, 03:59:07 pm
This it the funniest fake Camilla story ever  :laugh:

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2015/06/kate-middleton-bans-camilla-parker-bowles-from-home-over-scandal/


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on June 09, 2015, 09:18:37 pm
 :laugh:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tpearl on June 17, 2015, 12:46:33 am
Too funny


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on June 20, 2015, 10:29:47 am
I know this is from 2010 and old news, but it did make me wonder just how much more they cost us now, 5 years on.  Shudder to think about it really.

Team Charles and Camilla (all 124 of them, costing £6m... from the man who runs his bath to the woman who talks to plants)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1321220/Team-Charles-Camilla-124-costing-6m--man-runs-bath-woman-talks-plants.html#ixzz3dVo61jmt


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: leogirl on June 20, 2015, 10:47:42 am
How much of their money comes from the taxpayer? And how much do they get for the income from the land they own? It makes me wonder if they would be able to afford this on their own (without digging into their savings) or if the taxpayer is paying for everything.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on June 20, 2015, 11:51:15 am
^the land is also the taxpayer's? they organise both lancaster and cornwall but it's not theirs

http://royalgossip.forumprofi.de/index.php/topic,5289.0.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on June 20, 2015, 02:32:10 pm
Think not? Just try taking it away from them.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on June 20, 2015, 09:54:36 pm
They may think whatever they want and if they are thrown out they may try to get it but the thread I've mentioned has a lot of info on why they have no rights. That they think x doesn't make it right.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: FortressODaveBarry on October 02, 2015, 05:41:47 pm
Charles calls Camilla "baby girl" / "beloved" in Hindi. Since the word is "mehbooba", I think we'll all get a lot of mileage out of that one  :P
 
http://life.spectator.co.uk/2015/09/prince-charles-calls-the-duchess-of-cornwall-his-baby-girl/


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on October 02, 2015, 06:12:10 pm
I wonder what nickname he has given Fawcett.

Pass  me the sick bucket please.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on October 02, 2015, 09:14:37 pm
Drippy?? Sweetums?  :tehe:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: leogirl on October 03, 2015, 06:02:51 am
Sweetykins.  :ick:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on October 03, 2015, 11:57:54 am
Where is Fawcett now? Is he tucked away at Highgrove?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 15, 2015, 02:14:59 am
I still think marriage was a huge mistake on Charles' part; if he was about to be investigated for giving Camilla money he had no business giving her, he could have dropped her for good and gone on in life. Talk about misplaced loyalty. Camilla never put him first, she preferred Andrew PB, she keeps Raymill to retreat to, and her kids have done nothing but freeload off of the marriage. So how this can be the love of their lives is really beyond me.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 16, 2015, 12:44:28 am
Charles naming Camilla back in 1994 had numerous ramifications. I think from then on, he was obligated. She was no longer "safe" when APB and Camilla divorced. And her father was after Charles about what he was going to do. He had to hire an expensive spin doctor to attempt to whitewash. He could have married someone more suitable but it was a case of foot in mouth disease when he blabbed that he cheated with Camilla via his authorized biographer he indicated he would keep on seeing her.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: dianab on November 16, 2015, 03:53:01 am
By 1994, everyone else & their brother knew of his cheating with Camilla. It was not seen as 'gossip', 'speculation' - whatever you likes call it.

If anything, the whitewash started in 1994, as Charles did not open up about his other women during the marriage.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 16, 2015, 02:09:22 pm
Of course it was an open secret. After the Morton book, Charles pals got away with trying to say there was no affair (even the royals received APB and CPB as a presumably happily married couple). But when Charles opened his mouth that he cheated and Camilla was named, then all bets were off and APB and CPB's plans for divorce announcement came soon after.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: CathyJane on November 16, 2015, 09:27:15 pm
I still think marriage was a huge mistake on Charles' part; if he was about to be investigated for giving Camilla money he had no business giving her, he could have dropped her for good and gone on in life. Talk about misplaced loyalty. Camilla never put him first, she preferred Andrew PB, she keeps Raymill to retreat to, and her kids have done nothing but freeload off of the marriage. So how this can be the love of their lives is really beyond me.

 :thumbsup:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 17, 2015, 05:43:42 am
Of course it was an open secret. After the Morton book, Charles pals got away with trying to say there was no affair (even the royals received APB and CPB as a presumably happily married couple). But when Charles opened his mouth that he cheated and Camilla was named, then all bets were off and APB and CPB's plans for divorce announcement came soon after.

I wonder what is wrong with the BRF when they willingly received a woman who was part of the destruction of the Wales marriage and somehow support a woman who was part of a scandal that brought about the loss of many perks and prerogatives that the BRF took for granted. In the Latin American countries, Juan Peron is to everyone's knowledge one of FEW aspiring heads of state who married his mistress and that caused a horrific scandal in society. If this had been the US, Camilla would have been dropped and told to bug off for good. Charles seriously lacks the guts to do the right thing.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 17, 2015, 02:12:24 pm
Charles, as a US politician, if he married the mistress that was the other woman would be told to step down or  would not get re-elected.  Charles thought for some odd reason it was "good" to out the mistress. Then blamed others when it backfired.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on December 05, 2015, 01:18:53 am
Quote
Which is where Charles comes in, Charles doesn't need them. I'm thinking like many other things HM has given over the responsibility of dealing with the Middleton's over to Charles, which is why Wimpo isn't looking like a happy bunny lately and KMiddy is acting rather cowed into submission cause Charles is holding on to the purse strings, hence the exclusive rights to the pics as well as her organic baby food idea. They need more money cause Charles isn't giving it without them working more, which they don't want to do.

I think Christmas will be very telling on several levels, that's for sure.

I wanted to post on this without getting off topic; I think this is the truth.

Kate has been putting in more appearances and all have been serious and respectable ones. She looks very stiff and in a state of shock, as if she just found out something that caused great shock. It wouldn't surprise me if Charles laid down the law and basically explained he would be yanking the purse straings again and that Kate would be out on her arse if she started shirking appearances. No more giggly sliipping hair, no more breaking protocol, and no more messing around by testing HM's authority. I wondered why Charles didn't do it sooner, but HM had to give him that authority. As fior the various projects, I don't think Kate will be doing that. From then on, duties and appearances and while William can't be given the boot out, he can have his status demoted by being assigned only worthless appearances. I do think Charles has been behind stuff like them not getting prestigious roles and I do think Charles has responded badly to articles begging him to step down and of course, seeing his mother and Sovereign have her authority challenged constantly.

Charles yanking the clothing budget
Charles blocking them from doing more high level charity work
Charles now able to unload on them at will (something that intimidated Diana)
Charles now able to enforce HM's edicts and requests
Charles merrily taking the MIddletons head on when the Middletons challenge HM
Charles spending time forcing WK to account for their spending


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on December 05, 2015, 01:57:08 am
No way would Charles ever be bypassed by by William IMO. William does not appear to want the Queen's job any time soon. William likes the perks of being a senior royal but is avoiding full time royal duties for as long as he can. I think the Queen finally got the hint that the laziness of William and Kate is not winning them praise and she gave them work. Whether William and Kate got in their vacation is subject to speculation. But perhaps the Queen and Charles are now requiring them to work before they can take vacations. Something that should have happened from the get go.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on December 05, 2015, 04:44:20 am
Charles has the purse strings and I am certain the reason for a lack of vacation is how Charles told them that the free ride is over. If Kate misses her annual trip to Mustique, I am certain that those halcyon days are officially over and she's being reined in for good. Charles has balls nad I am certain that he's now living out his dream of wielding the whip hand over the both of them. Not HM, but Charles is in charge of the nitwits. It would explain the lack of vacatino and Kate's sudden interest in doing her job.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Rosella on December 05, 2015, 05:01:41 am
^ ^ William has millions though, in his bank account, enough surely to be able to afford a couple of airfares and some spending money. It was always said that Ma and Pa Middleton paid for most of the Mustique family vacation each year.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Val on March 02, 2016, 02:00:07 pm
http://a-alleged paedophile.beforeitsnews.com/eu/2014/09/bill-maloney-names-prince-charles-as-a-alleged paedophile-2569276.html

The Kingdom will certainly leave him if reports like this are true.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on March 02, 2016, 03:28:49 pm
Well, he was tight with his grand friend that cretin SIR Jimmy Saville who was knighted. I think that speaks volumes, don't you?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on April 11, 2016, 07:38:36 am
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3533160/How-ghost-Diana-haunts-Highgrove-Charles-stages-festival-celebrate-beloved-garden-RICHARD-KAEYE-reveals-poignant-secret.html


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Miss Hathaway on April 18, 2016, 11:35:31 pm

Christopher Andersen has a new book out tomorrow, "Game of Crowns".   I hope it will have new gossip in it . . . .    :cookie:

http://nypost.com/2016/04/16/how-operation-pb-aims-to-take-camilla-from-mistress-to-queen/

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/confidential/duchess-cornwall-sabotaged-duchess-cambridge-article-1.2603272


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on May 28, 2016, 09:46:16 pm
Crazy, but I have always thought there was something wrong about the photo of chucky and council cath at the top of this page.   Tonight for some unknown reason it just hit me  -  it is photoshopped and cobbled together.  No way was chucky looking that young in 2010 when the engagement was announced and council cath was allegedly welcomed into the family.  Maybe I am slow on the uptake, I just knew something was wrong with it, just never thought too much about it. Silly me.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on May 28, 2016, 09:51:38 pm
LOL it was the chocolate princess who made the photoshop (our admin), the original has Will with Kate


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on May 31, 2016, 10:59:37 pm
I wish we could remove it and her.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: leogirl on June 02, 2016, 04:27:08 am
It's Charles in 1981 and Diana's hand on his shoulder and Kate's head and William's hand on her shoulder. Half of each engagement photo.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Val on June 02, 2016, 08:22:47 am
^

Perhaps Ben Ainsley should be substituted for Charles and Jecca added somewhere.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: kolkomilko on June 03, 2016, 09:10:13 am
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/prince-charles-gay-globe-report-queen-elizabeth-boy-toy/1/682300.html

Diana has already hinted at it if I remember well.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on June 04, 2016, 12:46:34 am
Hewitt did via his interviews with Ms. Pasternack author of Princess in Love. Hewitt claimed CHarles told Diana he was gay, as an "excuse" for his not sleeping with her anymore.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: gingerboy24 on July 11, 2016, 04:16:27 pm
^^  Well talked about on many publications.  Not sure if is Michael Fawcett, his valet or whatever he is, is the current person, apparently he told camzilla Fawcett was not negotiable.  It is also alleged that camzilla knows all about it, and she is a smoke screen.  Also great pals with Jimmy Savile, and visited him at his cottage up in Scotland, in the wilkds somewhere.  He also has other "dubious friends" from the right quarters as well.    Google it, there is loads of info.  It is also alleged that quite a few of the royal males have a penchant for "young children".  Much gossip over the years, and well known to many.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: india on July 11, 2016, 08:33:49 pm
I have been hearing all about this for decades.


Title: Charles and Camilla's most hated day of the year.. is today.
Post by: Tatiana on August 31, 2016, 07:15:00 pm
  The anniversary of Diana's death.   Some interesting articles and comments out there. 


Title: Re: Charles and Camilla's most hated day of the year.. is today.
Post by: india on August 31, 2016, 07:47:26 pm
They made a big mistake 19 years ago. And her boys know the truth.


Title: Re: Charles and Camilla's most hated day of the year.. is today.
Post by: sandy on September 02, 2016, 12:15:58 am
The big mistake was Charles huge sense of entitlement. Camilla married someone else, Kanga married someone else but Charles still had them as his mistresses. Charles should have had counseling before he even thought of marrying someone. And Camilla advising him about his bride to be was really very twisted and sick IMO anyway. Diana never stood a chance. But Charles did get those heirs. I have no sympathy for C and C. They deserve each other.


Title: Re: Charles and Camilla's most hated day of the year.. is today.
Post by: Tatiana on September 06, 2016, 04:32:29 am
   I am re reading Stephen Barry's book, he was Charles' valet when Diana came on the scene.  He states Diana was invited to stay at Camilla and APB's home, which was very close to Highgrove, when Charles was asking Diana to marry him.   Wicked People.  :bat:


Title: Re: Charles and Camilla's most hated day of the year.. is today.
Post by: sandy on September 06, 2016, 05:44:25 pm
Charles and Camilla I think are not the least bit sorry.


Title: Re: Charles and Camilla's most hated day of the year.. is today.
Post by: Tatiana on September 07, 2016, 12:42:22 am
  They are a pair of raptors.  :sigh:


Title: Are Chas and Cam related. ?
Post by: Tatiana on September 10, 2016, 03:45:51 am
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3782534/What-naughty-girl-Former-maid-reveals-Camilla-s-great-granny-Alice-Keppel-famously-seduced-Edward-VII-bedded-men-money.html

     Camilla's grandmother Sonia Keppel is reported to be illegitimate daughter of Edward VII and Alice Keppel. 


Title: Re: Are Chas and Cam related. ?
Post by: meememe on September 10, 2016, 04:04:42 am
Absolutely as they are both descendants of James I and VI - as was Diana and is Sarah Ferguson. All three women are descended from one or more of the mistresses of Charles II, James I and VIs' grandson while Charles is descended from James' daughter - Elizabeth (whose youngest daughter was Sophia of Hanover and from whom the Hanoverians claim the throne.)


Title: Re: Are Chas and Cam related. ?
Post by: Tatiana on September 10, 2016, 05:42:24 am
  This is a question of second cousins once removed, a lot more recent than Mary Queen of Scot's son, James VI and I.


Title: Re: Are Chas and Cam related. ?
Post by: HennyPenny on September 10, 2016, 06:09:28 am

 I don't think Charles would care. It would only strengthen his argument in his mind that she has the royal blood to be Queen.. Let us  remember until recently the royal  would attend  family gatherings looking for a spouse ...


Title: Re: Are Chas and Cam related. ?
Post by: meememe on September 10, 2016, 06:25:01 am
  This is a question of second cousins once removed, a lot more recent than Mary Queen of Scot's son, James VI and I.

The question asked was 'are they related?' not 'how closely are they related'?

The simple answer is that they are related - like most of the aristocracy who are mostly descended from James I and VI through Charles II and his large brood of illegitimate children whose descendants married into many of the aristocratic families of England.

There is no real evidence that Sonia is Edward VII's child - just rumour and speculation. He never acknowledged her as his illegitimate child and given the fact that Alice was hardly monogamous even at the time she was Edward's mistress, it would be hard to prove without DNA evidence and that isn't going to happen.

The article also has a number of 'errors' and is relying on the memories of an 80+ year old women who worked below stairs.



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Alexandrine on September 11, 2016, 10:22:02 pm
Does it matter? It's not as if there are not marriages between cousins or even between aunts and uncles in their families.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: leogirl on September 12, 2016, 12:07:55 am
 :ick:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on September 12, 2016, 07:56:36 pm
I think it more than a "could have been" speculation for Sonia Keppel being the child of Edward VII. Some writers say her father was a wealthy banker that Alice Keppel had a liaison with. There was no DNA testing like the ones for the deceased Russian Royal Family some years ago.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on September 12, 2016, 10:27:24 pm
  Camilla's grt grandmother had sex with rich men for money.   It is well documented.   Is Camilla any different. ?  She lost her fortune in the Lloyds Bank Fiasco.   Amazingly she now owns a manor house, and her children are now millionaires.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: leogirl on September 13, 2016, 01:51:41 am
Prostitutes (women who have sex for money) should not be rewarded with titles and jewels.  :thumbsdown:  :ick:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on September 13, 2016, 02:03:53 am
In Latin American culture, men who marry their mistresses are often discredited. I was reading a biography about Dorothy Dandridge and while a wealthy industrialist courted her, he would never marry her because of her profession as an actress. Now, while I think having a past is nothing to be ashamed of, I think the minute a woman decides to be a mistress/side piece, that is where she should stay.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on September 13, 2016, 05:17:30 am
  Charles really shot himself in the foot when he married her.  They were going to do an investigation into his taxes, and how he was claiming her as a dependent.  Next thing, they are getting married.    It's well documented.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: leogirl on September 13, 2016, 10:42:21 am
Why was she a dependent? If he wanted to give her money, that's his business (as long as it's his money and not the taxpayers'), but don't claim her as a dependent. She was not a child or a disabled person who needed care.  :thumbsdown:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on September 13, 2016, 05:19:23 pm
It's the business of the taxpayers when he's putting their money in Camilla's pockets. Nothing Charles has is his own, in the sense that he took nothing and made something. The money he has is all from the taxpayers and shouldn't be going to his mistress.


Title: C&C decorate biscuit tin after her marriage to APB
Post by: Tatiana on October 09, 2016, 10:43:40 pm
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/royals/1844595/Prince-Charles-Camillas-tin-joke.html


Title: He took the demise
Post by: FrederickLouis on January 02, 2017, 10:27:09 pm
Do you think that Prince Charles took the demise of Earl Louis Mountbatten of Burma harder than Prince Philip did?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on January 18, 2017, 06:32:11 am
  Louis was a meddler, I'm sure Philip and Elizabeth got over it quite quickly.. I know the QM did.


Title: Re: He took the demise
Post by: Kuei Fei on January 18, 2017, 07:48:36 am
Do you think that Prince Charles
took the demise of Earl Louis Mountbatten of Burma harder than Prince Philip did?

Yes; Charles was wounded at the loss of his honorary father and frankly Lord Louis was the one who drilled it into his head that he could only marry a virgin, while sleeping with everything that walked before he decided to settle down.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on January 18, 2017, 02:45:47 pm
Charles carried the "getting experience" thing too far selecting married women and the "senior" mistress getting above herself. There was a letter where Mountbatten was sick of the way Charles was behaving and warned him he would end up like his great uncle David. The Queen Mum another Edwardian instilled in Charles that he was "special" and "above" ethical behavior and could more or less do what he pleased.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: leogirl on January 18, 2017, 11:41:47 pm
So gross. Married women should be off limits. As for unmarried women, men can't expect to marry a virgin if they're sleeping around, there will be no virgins left. And no virgin is going to want to marry a man who can't control himself.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on January 19, 2017, 02:16:09 am
He only messed with those who were outside of his class; Camilla was not titled or from the senior aristocracy. Once while Charles was dating Lady Sarah Spencer, Charles went clubbing with this socialite named Chantal; someone asked Sarah about how  she (Sarah) felt and Sarah replied that she didn't feel insecure since Chantal was not 'one of them' and therefore not a contender for Charles' hand on marriage. Charles also blew through beauty queens, models, and basically messed with all and sundry but didn't marry any of them.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on January 21, 2017, 06:52:32 am
  Charles always liked the Mumsy types .. the ones who spoiled him, and fussed over him,  like his Nanny Mabel and Granny did.  His valet Stephen B said Charles as an adult loved to to the old nursery at tea time.  :sly:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: deGuernsey on February 16, 2017, 06:14:29 pm
^ I hope this is the correct thread and I do apologise in advance if it isn't and mods feel they need to move it. :flower:

I am wondering how to pose this question I have without upsetting people or eliciting a groan and a roll of the eyes... :laugh: I know just very few of the basics and really not much else. So bear with me: exaclty who is Camilla Parker-Bowles? I know she is married to Prince Charles and she was married at least twice... she has a few children. ... but was she born in UK? Some people say she is not but I always thought she is English. I have also heard she is related to HMQ (and Fergie, too? :dontknow:) but others say English born but ancestors from across the pond. I know there is quite a lot of inaccurate information on internet (believe me I KNOW :o) but I am genuinely curious.  

I seem to think I have asked before so if anyone has answered me I didn't see it and/or forgot.  :sorry: I ahve also asked about PD but she was born in England. Thanks in advance.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: FrederickLouis on February 16, 2017, 10:35:25 pm
^deGuernsy, Here is a biography of Camilla:     
http://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/camilla-parker-bowles-3461.php


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: deGuernsey on February 17, 2017, 02:10:18 am
^ Thanks FLouis... I'll look at it tomorrow when I Ihave time. I do hope it answers my questions. :thankyou:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Rosella on February 17, 2017, 02:46:26 am
^ DeGuernsey, I can fill in some of the gaps, I think.

Camilla is completely British. Her father Bruce Shand, of Scottish descent, was the son of a well known architectural writer who was a friend of architects and furniture designers. Bruce's father and mother divorced when he was young and he, his mother and stepfather lived in the US, where his stepfather designed golf courses. Bruce was educated in England though. One of his half-sisters was Baroness Howe.

Bruce became an army officer and then a businessman and wine merchant. He married Rosalind Cubitt just after World War Two. They had a home in London and a home in the country. Bruce was later Lord Lieutenant of Sussex.

 Camilla's mother Rosalind came from a wealthy and aristocratic family. She was the daughter of the 3rd Baron Ashcombe and her mother Sonia was the daughter of the Hon George Keppel and his wife Alice, who was the daughter of the Fourth Baronet Edmonstone and became mistress to King Edward VII. Her family had a castle in Ireland and were descendants of the Kings of Scotland, like the Queen, so they are related many times removed. Camilla is also descended from King Charles II.

Camilla married Andrew Parker Bowles in 1973 after floating around London doing secretarial work. The PBs are an old Roman Catholic family, descended from the Earls of Macclesfield, and APB's mother was Dame Ann de Trafford, daughter of  the 4th Baronet Sir Humphrey De Trafford, a multi millionare racehorse owner. APB's parents were close friends of the Queen Mother and he was a page at the Queen's Coronation. Andrew was an officer in the Household Cavalry, probably the smartest regiment, socially, in the British Army, and he later commanded it.

For years Camilla and Andrew had an open marriage and in 1995 they divorced. Andrew married Rosemary Pitman who is now dead. Camilla has two children by Andrew, Tom, a cookery writer and Laura. Laura is married to Harry Lopes who is the grandson of Baron Roborough, and is likely to inherit the title and estates in Scotland and Devon. Their daughter Eliza was bridesmaid at William and Kate's wedding.

So Camilla is British on both sides of her family, was brought up in the countryside in England, and has been married twice, once to APB and now to Charles. She has two children and comes from a country gentry background with links to the aristocracy.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: deGuernsey on February 17, 2017, 06:26:14 am
^ Thank you Rosella. Yes, it does explain quite a lot. I just laugh whem people  say Camillla Cornwall has (Irish )Canadian and American ancestors or tll relations. But why make it up? It doesn't serve any purpose that I can think of except to use Camila C forntheir own social and maybe financial benefit? ?? Anyway, I am amazed you know so much about her. Are ypu related?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Rosella on February 17, 2017, 09:27:33 am
^ No, I'm not related to Camilla, DeGuernsey. Heaven forbid. I'm a Diana fan! I have read biographies on Charles and Camilla though. Alice, Camilla's greatgrandmother, as I posted, did have Irish blood and the family were related to the Scottish kings as well. She comes from very old gentry families on both sides and there might be some American blood in there from way back, who knows!


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: deGuernsey on February 17, 2017, 11:12:57 am
^  :flower:  :thankyou:
^^^^^ I just started reading the bio link FLouis gave me and I came across the words Camilla: philanthropist, humanitarian. ..  :o I don't *despise* on Camilla Cornwall but, really? REALLY?!!?  :tehe: off to read the rest. .. hopefully it's just as good... :bouncy:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 17, 2017, 02:53:04 pm
Charles spin knows no bounds. I am surprised the word "saint" was not listed there too considering...


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: deGuernsey on February 17, 2017, 03:35:15 pm
^ After reading the info provided by Rosella and FrLouis I decided to do a quick Google search of Camilla Cornwall and I found references to her Irish Canadian and American ancestry. What I read actually makes sense unlike the nonsense on wikitree genealogy site. I stand corrected ans no longer laugh when the above is mentioned. Unless someone is quoting wiki.  :laugh:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on February 17, 2017, 04:39:20 pm
Camilla's paternal great grandfather is unknown. It is doubtful she is the great granddaughter of Alice Keppel's husband. There were rumors Alice Keppel's daughter and Camilla's ancestor were a banker or King Edward. I doubt it will be definitively determined.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: FrederickLouis on February 17, 2017, 10:19:00 pm
^deGuernsey, Glad that you found the biography link informative.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: deGuernsey on February 18, 2017, 11:13:06 am
^ :hi: :flower:
Camilla's paternal great grandfather is unknown. It is doubtful she is the great granddaughter of Alice Keppel's husband. There were rumors Alice Keppel's daughter and Camilla's ancestor were a banker or King Edward. I doubt it will be definitively determined.
Perhaps Camilla Ihas already done DNA testing and knows? :dontknow: I know I would want to know.  

I want to thank everyone who helped me. You all are great!  :loveshower:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: FrederickLouis on May 28, 2017, 02:05:44 am
When Charles is King, do you believe he will make several visits to countries in the Commonwealth?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: meememe on May 28, 2017, 04:43:12 am
Unless he is already in his mid-late 80s I would expect him to visit at least all the other realms within the first two years of becoming King.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on May 28, 2017, 07:01:45 am
He'll go all over the place and revel in being feted as King; I am certain that he'll go to as many countries as he can to get the plaudits.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on May 28, 2017, 03:16:24 pm
IF the DM article is any indication, there will be promotion of Camilla to sainthood during his reign.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Tatiana on May 28, 2017, 09:38:30 pm
  Charles and Camz are not wanted in many Commonwealth countries.    :snob:


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: FrederickLouis on October 17, 2017, 01:23:35 am
Where does Prince Charles get his official royal stationery from?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: HRHOlya on October 17, 2017, 12:21:04 pm
Likely Smythson, I think they (the whole family) have used Smythson's for ages (ie generations). Liz the queen mum is said to have used Crane's though, a US brand.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: FrederickLouis on October 18, 2017, 01:54:05 am
Is Smythson's based in London?


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: HRHOlya on October 18, 2017, 12:12:17 pm
^ Yes, it is. An old English brand, dating back to the late 19th century (it was created in the 1880s) and supposedly used by Victoria. They have gorgeous stationery! And the price to match.
They also all seem to use fountain pens, which isn't that great a novelty in Europe tbh. The best way to do handwritten correspondence is with fountain pen and half decent paper anyway  :thumbsup: Liz uses still an old Parker 51 she's had for about 70 or so years! (though not only that one, she's really not that frugal).


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: FrederickLouis on October 20, 2017, 01:57:31 am
^Smythson's sounds like a wonderful place to visit. The stationery would be marvelous to see.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 21, 2018, 09:13:58 pm
I truly do think that if Charles would have gotten more of an education (with his time and money on his hands, it would in fact be easy to balance schooling with duties) and would stop marketing himself as a harmless old codger, I am certain that it would be best if he would STOP trying to be loved by his people. He needs respect, not love at this point in time and he is lacking in both.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: meememe on November 21, 2018, 10:11:46 pm
He had a fine education - university degree followed by military service followed by a life of duty in support of the Queen. There was an entire council of advisors to the Queen set up to advise on how to educate Charles and that advice was followed. The council included the PM and Archbishop of Canterbury at the time.

Since he left the navy he has been working full-time for his mother ... and the recent documentary made it clear just how hard he works to the point that his sons were saying they had to wade through papers to get to him to say good night and he often fell asleep while working at his desk. The hand-shakes and waving is the visible side of the monarchy but they do a lot more behind closed doors.

He has also ensure that he has been advised by the best experts around and reads widely on many subjects. People who have been invited to talk to him on their areas of interest have all said how informed he is before they even start.

A piece of paper doesn't mean an education. There are many other ways to get educated and Charles has followed them - by pursuing a life-long education.

He was speaking on environmental issues in the 70s and was laughed at but now - 40 years on - we are actually agreeing with his ideas - far from a 'silly old codger' he is a man ahead of his time.


Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: sandy on November 21, 2018, 11:24:11 pm
He did not get the best grades. The military service was not the best--he crashed a plane and got an anchor caught on a cable.

The royals DO have to be seen working, the behind closed doors cannot be what they get by on.

Charles has had very questionable mentors. Like Van Der Post and he was an admirer of Armand Hammer. Mountbatten was more self serving when he advised Charles.

Charles acts like he was the first to speak about the environment. He wasn't. It was actually Rachel Carson whose Silent Spring was a groundbreaking book.

He does act like a silly old codger on his appearances, pointing and giggling. Not a good look for him.

http://www.rachelcarson.org/

The first Earth Day took place in 1970 before Charles started expounding on it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Day



Title: Re: Random Chat
Post by: Kuei Fei on November 21, 2018, 11:29:07 pm
It was easy for Charles to promote organic farming despite crop losses; he didn't have to rely on a good crop to feed his nation and second, he had the taxpayer catching him when the crops failed.