I know many of you don't like to discuss the Royal Family, so please don't post in this thread

[CatWoman]

I would like to discuss this issue: Camilla Parker Bowles was invited to attend the Diana Memorial Ceremony (by the two princes, so they say), and she accepted.

However, public pressure forced her to rethink her decision.

What say you? Should she have gone?

Why or why not?

Camilla pulled out of Diana memorial on Queen's advice

A word from the Queen led to the Duchess of Cornwall's announcement yesterday that she would not be attending the Diana memorial service.

According to insiders, Camilla agonised to her mother-in-law about the dilemma she felt her presence would present.

Buckingham Palace had watched with growing unease the insistence of Clarence House courtiers that Camilla's presence at the event would be "appropriate".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=477870&in_page_id=1770&ct=5

[Robbien]

1. She was right to accept the invitation and she was right to pull out

If she didn't accept the invitation, she would have gotten bad press.

This way she honored her step sons' wishes and then honored the publics wishes.

[CatWoman]

3. good answer

:)

[hlthe2b]

30. I agree totally...,

She did the right thing... twice.


Her presence would have been distracting, at the least, and anger-producing for many, given the circumstances of her relationship with Diana. Yet, she was right to honor the invitation and to give it appropriate consideration.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

49. Excellent answer! n/t

[Hepburn]

2. Yuck on Camilla!

[CatWoman]

5. now THAT'S a keeper!!!

:rofl:

[Karenina]

11. I SO OBJECT to that characterization.

SHE is and has been, since forever, his friend and confidante. The marriage with the "perfect princess" his mom engineered resulted in...

[CatWoman]

13. K,

Perhaps he should have been a MAN and married Camilla in the first place, eh?

Don't blame his mom for his reprehensible actions.

[Hepburn]

20. Bingo! n/t

[Karenina]

22. Well, Yeah...

but we were ALL YOUNG then, eh? To marry Camilla back then would have required from him something he had not, at that time, had a chance to begin to develop, e.g. the self-confidence to confront his mom.

Forgive me, CW. Since our childhood I've had a soft spot in my heart for the guy. Even wrote him once...

[Beausoir]

79. He wasn't young...for godsakes. HE was a grown man who used a young girl very ill.

[Scout]

53. exactly, thank you! n/t

[Hepburn]

15. So..."friend and confidante" is now what someone is called who...

...is fucking a married man? Thanks for the up-date on the new term!

:hi:

[calimary]

She was there before Diana - fucking a then-unmarried man. I still wonder why they didn't

just marry each other in the first place? He never stopped loving her. Why the hell didn't they just marry way back when? Never have figured that one out. Hindsight is clear as a bell, of course. But for heaven's sakes, I still don't see why they didn't go with Plan A - when they both loved each other, and THAT had the greatest chance to succeed, rather than have him enter into a loveless marriage that was thereby set up much more easily to fail.

[Hepburn]

28. Well, maybe it is just me....

....but when a bed mate marries someone else and leaves you ~~ maybe one should take a hint?

[Karenina]

31. He's the CROWN PRINCE

and his MOM, the QUEEN, said NO WAY, JOSE.

[CatWoman]

36. yet his still defied her

by continuing to see Camilla while he was married.

Your point?

[Karenina]

50. Is that those two have had an enduring relationship

protocol be damned.

[Horse with no Name]

92. AND after he produced an "heir and a spare"

The Queen didn't really care about his relationship with Camilla OR Diana.

[JanMichael]

35. However, SHE was married.

Camilla Parker Bowles has a long history of tackiness- stop trying to spin it.

It is just lovely that they have managed to finally get together---but, most of her life she was an adulterer.

And a tacky one at that.

[Me.]

59. She Had A Long History Of Sleeping Around

and wasn't considered suitable. Plus, Charles took off for a year to fulfill his naval duties and she not wanting to wait around, married one of his chums.

[CatWoman]

86. it's in her blood

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4158371

HRH the Duchess of Cornwall, formerly Camilla Parker Bowles (née Shand), became famous for being the 'third person' in the marriage between Prince Charles, heir to the British throne and Diana, Princess of Wales.

The relationship between 'Fred' and 'Gladys' (as they affectionately nicknamed each other) is thought by some to be one of the greatest royal love stories, comparable to that of Charles's great uncle, King Edward VIII, who famously gave up the throne so that he might marry the woman he loved.

This entry tells the story of their relationship from when they first met in 1970, until their marriage in 2005.

Miss Camilla Shand

Camilla Rosemary was born in London, England, on 17 July, 1947. She grew up in rural Sussex and was educated at the Queens Gate School in South Kensington, before finishing school in Switzerland and France. Her only claim to fame was that she was a descendant of Alice Keppel, who became King Edward VII's mistress when he was Prince of Wales. So, what better ice-breaker could you use, when introduced to the current Prince of Wales, than mention the fact that your ancestors got it on?

[Cha]

77. My best guess is ..those boys

needed to be born! :)

[KiraBS]

27. Yes because it was deeper than sex...

He has only ever loved Camilla, she was and is his best friend.

[mondo joe]

42. Deeper than sex - but included sex.

If he only ever loved her, he did them both a disservice by marrying another woman.

[Sal Minella]

45. My husband (a college professor) had a student who was a friend and confidante and,

apparently, also a very good fuck.

When one is married, one befriends and confides in one's spouse.
That is all.

[Scout]

54. and thank you too!

"When one is married, one befriends and confides in one's spouse.
That is all."

if you're not done fucking other people, do not get married.

if you really must start fucking other people again once married, then get a divorce first then fuck away.

[calimary]

84. I agree wholeheartedly.

I think so much grief could have been avoided if they'd been true to their instincts way back before marriages were sealed and vows were exchanged and children were born. Then again, there are lots of marriages out there about which we could say the same thing.

[kskiska]

62. And Judith Nathan was Rudy's "good friend" and confidante

Look how that ended up.

[mondo joe]

41. "His mom engineered"? What was he, 8 years old when he got married?

Please.

[scarletwoman]

24. I've never understood why this woman, who has no practical effect on ANYONE'S personal life outside

of the Royal circle, should be so mocked and derided.

I find your graphic not just unamusing but quite disgusting. Make fun of people in actual power all you want. But Camilla Parker Bowles has absolutely NO power to harm you and in no way deserves such disparagement.

And that's all beside the most basic point: mocking powerless people for their looks is rude and juvenile.

sw

[KiraBS]

32. Camilla's biggest crime isn't that she had an affair with

Prince Charles, it is that she didn't look like Princess Diana. And Camilla never
used the media either, so they had no reason to be friendly to her.

[Hepburn]

33. ....

:eyes:

I just have a thing about someone who interferes in someone else's marriage. If she was the most beautiful woman in the world, she would still be ugly on the inside. Ugly is as ugly does....and screwing around with a married man who has small children is an ugly thing to do. Sorry that my graphic hit you as juvenile. Guess you never look at the editorial cartoons of Bush and laugh, right?

Sheesh!

[scarletwoman]

55. If you had read my post carefully, you would have noted that I specifically

differentiated between the mockery of people in power, and the mockery of people who have no power.

I'm all for mocking people in power, but Camilla has no power whatsoever.

And I'm sorry, but your taking personal offense at adulterous behavior on the part of people who have absolutely no connection to your own life is just petty judgementalism.

How far does you self-righteousness go? Should she be stoned for adultery? Beheaded? Wear a scarlet letter 'A'? Be put in the stocks? Are you somehow a more virtuous and reasonable person because you would limit her punishment to dehumanization via derisive graphics?

Sorry that you don't get that your graphic IS juvenile.

sw

[Scout]

57. her ACTIONS are what's the ugliest about her ....

she screwed around on her husband with Charles while he was single, then screwed Charles while he was screwing around on his wife while he was married to her.

and don't worry, I despise Charles just as much for being a wimp and a coward.

[scarletwoman]

60. Well, you know... Let them that have committed no sin cast the first stones...

Do you honestly think that this sort of thing doesn't happen a million times all over the planet all the time? Or should only famous people be singled out for your moral outrage?

[OzarkDem]

63. Charles & Camilla were particularly cruel

in the way they carried on their affair while not doing much to hide it from Diana or even the public.

Keep in mind, Camilla became an everyday part of Diana's life, she was always around and made decisions that affected her.

[scarletwoman]

65. Okay, extra points for cruelty. No other human beings on the planet have EVER behaved so badly.

Forget it. I've obviously entered a thread that is way too bizarre for me.

Sorry, I'll leave now.

[Scout]

68. good. n/t

[Catherine Vincent]

72. I understand what you're saying.

That toon was harsh. But I guess some thought it was funny.

[Beausoir]

80. Yes, they WERE very cruel. But apparently, that is the norm at court. Serial adultery.

[Scout]

67. i don't think much of ANYONE who is an adulterer, whether they are

famous or not.

i'm not perfect of course, but i am not an adulterer.

[OzarkDem]

70. A rule I had during my single years

Never (knowingly) date a married man. I never liked the idea of hurting others in a family, though lots of my single friends fell in love with and dated married men. It never seemed to work out well for them.

[Scout]

75. adulterers have no honor.

don't most people take some kind of VOW to be faithful, or love, honor, respect? how is screwing someone you're not married to keeping those vows?

if both people are single and on the up-and-up with each other then have fun!!! i did.

[Ellen Forradalom]

100. A fine basis

for self-respect. :eyes:

[Canuckistanian]

43. Reminds me of a National Lampoon article

Royal Family to go On Strike

Today, the Royal Family has decided to go on strike, causing a severe shortage of horse-faced women with hats.....

:rofl:

[Beausoir]

83. OMG! That? Is hilarious.

[1monster]

4. Frankly, I don't see any reason she shouldn't attend. If my husband's first wife

died, and their son asked us to attend, we would.

While things are friendlier now between us than they were say ten or so years ago, I still wouldn't call us best buddies (not by a long shot).

Charles and Camilla are married now; there is no legitmate reason to ban Camilla from the memorial service. Her attendance would have been a show of respect.

So Camilla and Charles had an affair before Diana and he were divorced. That is water under the bridge. Besides, Diana was no angel. She had at least two affairs before they were separated.

[hlthe2b]

34. No one is banning her...

Camilla is taking the high road, I think, in honoring the sensitivities of many. She accepted the invitation, thereby honoring both her stepsons and Diana's memory. She then wisely took time to consider the impact of her being there on the event itself--which it is hard to argue would not be extremely distracting, given the history. Thus, she elects not to attend. No one is banning her.

Good on Camilla....

[MiniMe]

85. Since she was having an affair with Diana's husband...

she is right not to go. A agree with the earlier poster, since William and Harry invited her, she should have accepted. That they invited her probably meant a lot to her. However, no matter how circumspect she is, the press would have a field day with it, especially the British press. By doing it the way she is, she has a chance to give several very nice comments on Diana, and showing her respect by not going. Well done Camilla.

[Bunny]

6. No, she should not have gone. It would be wildly inappropriate, IMO.

She may be accepted by the princes, and by the public (maybe grudgingly) but she'll forever be the Other Woman. To show up at anything related to Diana would be wrong.

[CatWoman]

7. my feelings exactly, Bunny

:)

:hi:

[spoony]

52. Yes, if for no other reason than it would detract from

where the attention belongs at such an event: with Diana.

[AlCzervik]

8. She was right not to go, the Princes may have felt like they should invite her

and not because they really wanted her there. the press probably would have had a field day if she actually showed up.

[in_cog_ni_to]

9. It would have been inappropriate for her to attend Diana's Memorial....the 3rd person in the

marriage, wouldn't have been appropriate. IMCPO. I don't think Diana was very fond of Camilla and Camilla should have a guilty conscience for having had an affair with Diana's husband....maybe that's why she's not going. GUILT.

[undeterred]

10. Prince Charles should have pulled out a long time ago

and maybe he and Diana would have had a shot at having a marriage.

Really, I think Diana at 35 would have been compatible with Charles at 45, but it was too late.

[NV Whino]

12. I think she should have refused from the get go

If indeed the Princes invited her a polite, "Thank you for wanting to include me, but I think it would be inappropriate for me to attend." would have been the right thing to do.

[scarletwoman]

16. I think your answer is the best. It's good she's not going, but it would have been much more classy

to have politely and diplomatically declined in the first place.

sw

[Sal Minella]

46. Bingo.

[lovuian]

14. I think she was smart

its a sore subject

[THUNDER HANDS]

17. wait, so the kids wanted her, but the Queen didn't?

am I reading that right?

Who gives a crap what the Queen thinks. It wasn't her daughter anyway.

And if the kids are okay with it, why not?

[CatWoman]

19. Hey Bud!!

:hi:

I think the "kids wanted her" is a strawman.

[THUNDER HANDS]

37. hey

:hi:

[dipsydoodle]

56. I don't think it actually said

the Queen didn't want her there. It said they discussed it.

Apart from that The Mails reputation is as follows :

Readers of the ‘’Mail’’ are typically held to be xenophobic, racist, homophobic, nostalgic, anti-government, poorly educated but relatively affluent, anti-Left, anti-liberal and “out of touch”. At British universities to imply that someone reads the ‘’Mail’’ amounts to an insult, as witnessed by the popularity of 'Anti-Daily Mail' groups created on the social-networking website Facebook.

You may gather that's from wikiwhatever.

I prefer to stick with private Eyes name for it " The Daily Hate Mail"

[dipsydoodle]

18. Answers seem to divide between

those who think Diane was an angel and those who see her as an angel wearing a Mercedes steering wheel as a halo. I'm one of the latter ones.

[CatWoman]

21. I wish I had started a lottery

as to when a dickhead response would pop up on this thread.

Here's hoping that one day you won't be unfortunate enough to sport a steering wheel halo.

[dipsydoodle]

23. If you'd bothered to search

you'd know I'm English. I happen to appreciate the Royal Family : not silly little tarts like Diana who marry into it just to become media stars.

[CatWoman]

29. what difference does your being English make?

tasteless is universal.

[hlthe2b]

38. you tell him, CW!

:rofl: and :toast:

[Beausoir]

82. Oh SNAP!

:toast:

[mondo joe]

48. It might be wiser to dislike people who arrange sham marriages, rather than the

young persons selected for them because the family thinks they will be pliable and compliant.

[KiraBS]

25. I think that she is right not to go...

I think it was right that she was asked, they accept her and I think it is right that
she declined. I like Camilla but attending the memorial of her husband's ex-wife is not really
appropriate.

[catzies]

26. So the Duchess of Cornwall has a good relationship with her mother-in-law?

That's nice, I guess.

I don't know what feelings Camilla has about Diana, but it's entirely appropriate she not be a part of the official observances. It's more respectful.

On my TV this afternoon there were 3 different networks airing Diana movie/tributes. I suppose it'll only increase this week leading up to Friday.

[CatWoman]

39. Lifetime and Fox News are really running it into the ground....

[treestar]

40. Why are they having a memorial ceremony at this point?

Is this a social problem that could affect anyone, or is it unique to Camilla?

I imagine she will be criticized either way.

[Scout]

44. Camilla can fucking eat shit and die for all I care about HER...

and Charles. She should not be at Diana's memorial.

I do like the Royals, but Charles really pissed me off fucking around on his wife.

I love Diana's boys, even though Harry has had a few public screw ups. I thought Diana brought a much needed breath of fresh air to the stodgy older generation, and I think she did a great job raising her sons to appreciate what they were born into and with, and to at least try to identify with normal people.

[dipsydoodle]

47. I've read through that article twice now

and simply cannot find the line you used

" However, public pressure forced her to rethink her decision."

Where is it ? I can't see any reference to "public" opinion at all.

[CatWoman]

51. The story has been updated

that was the original headline.

[Sukie1941]

58. My response is a bit late for this thread, but

When Diana married Charles, it was required (and checked out) that she be a virgin.

Camilla was not a virgin (Charles himself checked her out).

I think that is why Charles couldn't EVER marry Camilla.

[AspenRose]

74. Oh, he could have chosen to marry her....

....there just would have been "consequences" for it ( a la Edward and Wallis)

[OzarkDem]

61. BBC Special - Charles & Camilla had sex night before marriage to Diana?

They just said Charles and Camilla were in bed with each other in Buckingham Palace the night before his and Princess Diana's wedding?

I'd never heard that. Charles and Camilla are both cruel, selfish people. I really pity Diana and the mess she had to live with. It must have been very difficult.

[Katherine Brengle]

66. Ew. Some people have no class. nt

[Coexist]

76. that is unbelievably cruel.

the only way I could see that as being remotely acceptable is if it was the last time for the rest of their lives that they would be together, as long as he was married.

Otherwise, it was just her asserting her authority over him. How heartless and cold.

Blech. I don't care much for royalty, but I think I seriously dislike both of them now.

[MiniMe]

87. Charles would have and should have married Camilla from the get go

But the Queen squashed it. I don't remember if she was divorced or just not a virgin, something along those lines. Diana was just a pawn, and didn't realize it until it was too late.

[Katherine Brengle]

64. I was pretty young then, but wasn't she having an affair with Prince Charles while he was

married to Diana?

In that case, she has no business attending. It's disrespectful and I sincerely doubt it's something Diana (or anyone in the same position) would want.

[dipsydoodle]

69. By all accounts Diana was at it too

so on that basis she shouldn't be at her memorial either.

[OzarkDem]

71. Oh, come on

She didn't begin to fool around on Charles until well after her attempts at making their marriage work failed. Two wrongs don't make a right, but it was a different situation.

[skygazer]

94. Attempts at making their marriage work

Flinging herself down the stairs, throwing hysterical fits, being a prima donna - you know, I have a hard time feeling sorry for someone who married a man the entire country (if not the world) knew was besotted with another woman and who everyone knew was getting married so he could provide an heir, and who then turned on the "oh, poor me" act and portrayed herself as the victim of something.

Get real. Diana was a pouting little brat and while no one deserves to die the way she did, she certainly doesn't deserve to be seen as some angelic virgin goddess. She is a classic example of media spin, much of it her own creation.

[Mutineer]

73. Tacky to attend even if she was invited to go.

It wouldn't have been polite not to invite her but did they really think she'd show up? But she may have an entirely new perspective on Diana's life now that she's where Diana used to be.

[Beausoir]

78. She had absolutely NO business even thinking about attending.

She had many MANY chances to back-off with her adulterous relationship with Charles.

He was married to a very young girl and Camilla was never far away. She is and forever will be branded with the scarlet A. She cuckholded her husband, shamed her children, wormed her way into every level of The Wales' marriage and generally behaved like a pig.

As did he.

She is a tacky and grotesque as he is.

Institutional adultery.

[TahitiNut]

81. I don't mind discussing 'royalty' ...

... and the ways in which I'd like to see them vanish from the face of the planet. These parasites are the progeny of many centuries of predation on their own species ...worse than cannibals. Far worse. The perpetuation of the evil notion of 'class' and entitlement - possibly the most long-lived widespread corruption of the human species. It's the epitome of the banality of evil, imho.

[foreigncorrespondent]

88. She is right on both counts!

Firstly by accepting she is showing the world that she supports the sons of the late Princess by wanting to be there for them. But she is also right by not attending. There are people out there who would frown on her showing up considering she was the woman ole' Chucky was screwing while still being married to the late Princess.

I give her kudos for doing this.

[Booster]

89. She did the right and classy thing, but this poor woman can do

nothing right, and I feel sorry for her. When I watch Jay Leno make jokes about how she looks, I feel embarrassed for our entire country - how shallow. She can do nothing right in the eyes of the British because she caused Diana so much pain, and I say bullshit. Charles caused Diana pain, so let up on this poor woman already. Ten years is long enough.

[whoneedstickets]

90. I think she should have gone totally falling down drunk and made a pass at the pastor...

..if only to fill the pages of British tabloids and give us all a good laugh at these wealth inbreds.

[sniffa]

91. wow, she's stiLL with the prince?

the rumor is that she's secretLy gay. i can't beLieve she's stiLL hoLding up the ruse.

[renate]

93. in defense of Camilla (I can't believe I'm doing this)....

.... her husband was a total womanizer from Day One. So before Charles was married, I don't blame her for being an adulterer, because Andrew had cheated on her first. They were both okay--in fact, I assume they were both more than okay, because of the prestige of being either the Prince of Wales' mistress or her husband--with having an open marriage.

However, once Charles got married he should have just sucked it up and behaved. Part of the job description is to be a member of a family that can be looked up to; if you can't do that, you are free to leave, a la King Edward VIII. (Speaking of King Edwards, Edward VII behaved extremely badly too, with Camilla's great-great-grandmother, very publicly cheating on a woman who was by most accounts a sweetie... I don't have a lot of respect for him, either.)

Diana was human, not a saint, in private life, and was probably very hard to live with. (I think most women whose husbands took pictures of their mistresses along on the honeymoon would be difficult to live with.) And from what I've read, to meet Camilla is to like her--and I'm sure that's true. But I don't think it's cool for the woman who made Diana miserable (and--since Diana wouldn't have been without effective security if she'd still been married--dead) to become queen, as I'm sure she will eventually despite Charles' claims to the contrary.

There are many things I admire about Charles. I think his desire to make a contribution to his country, especially in preserving the traditions that give England its national character, is sincere. But he is constantly complaining about every little thing in his life that falls short of perfection and feeling sorry for himself. Self-pity is never attractive but in one to whom so much has been given it's positively repellent.

That's one reason I like the Queen so much. Her job may be a strange one, and one she didn't ask for other than being born, but she's done it with grace and an absolute lack of complaint ever since she started public life. She doesn't cry and moan like Charles does about how she gets no privacy, about how she actually has to pay a price for all the privileges she enjoys, how she has to act interested at the third school opening of the day, etc... she just gets on with it. That's the way it should be done.

[Midlodemocrat]

95. I despise the Queen. She knew full well that Diana was head

over heels in love with Charles and she also knew that he was just as big a philanderer as her own husband, yet she chose to keep it to herself.

I personally believe that she ruined that girl's life with her lies of omission and I also believe that Diana's death was less of an 'accident' than we were led to believe.

[Beausoir]

96. I agree with part of your post.....

The Queen has looked away at the ages-old practice of Royal Adultery. Yes.

But I do not believe that there was any conspiracy involved in the car crash.

Just very poor choices.

[renate]

98. I agree that the Queen should have done more to get Charles to cut it out

She did try (how hard, I obviously don't know) but he told her that Camilla was a non-negotiable part of his life. There's only so much a parent of an adult child can do. (She couldn't even take away his "allowance," which is his by law, not a gift from her.) However, he has a lot of respect for her and she probably could have done more to at least get him to stop flaunting his affair in Diana's face.

However, of his two parents, the one I really blame is Prince Philip, who is personally unpleasant and who is probably responsible for Charles' being the way he is. (As a boy Charles was really sweet and sensitive, but Philip wanted his son to be a man's man and bullied him horribly.) The Queen should have spoken up and stopped him, just like she definitely should have spoken up and defended Diana and tried harder to make Charles behave. Avoidance of her family's interpersonal problems has been a pattern she's followed ever since Margaret wanted to marry Peter Townsend (not Peter Townshend!), but although she's the head of state Philip is the head of the family and she pretty much goes along with whatever he says. So I agree that she bears some responsibility for what happened, but I think really the fault lies with Philip and most of all with Charles. Nobody made him commit adultery but himself.

(Upon reading this I see that I have spent WAY too much time reading about the royal family....)

[Stinky The Clown]

97. Question ... did Queenie haul her fat ass out of Balmoral?

She NEVER leaves Balmoral in August. She's worse than Il Dunce with that pig farm.

[DFLforever]

99. Maybe it's my Irish blood but I'm skeptical of this story

I think both the 'invitation' and its 'declining' were instigated from the Palace - a royal way of dealing with an extremely awkward situation.

Camilla had to be invited because she is now the wife of the Prince - but she must not attend because everyone in the country knew of her extra-marital connection to the Prince and the great distress it caused Diana.

[Forkboy]

101. Maybe I just feel like posting in this thread anyways.

So there! :P