What are your honest opinions of Camilla Parker Bowles today in 2022 ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Queen should have done what was rumored in the press-- pass over Charles+ the hag in favor of naming Wlls/Kate as the next king/queen.

No. She would have destroyed William and Charles’ relationship. She’s harmed enough relationships and seems to finally have realized she shouldn’t. The concession is longer she remains on the throne, less time time for Charles to be King.

She has to think of what is best for England-- not Charles. Wills + Kate represent the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And when, in the fullness of time, my son Charles becomes King, I know you will give him and his wife Camilla the same support that you have given me; and it is my sincere wish that, when that time comes, Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/05/uk/queen-elizabeth-ii-platinum-jubilee-accession-day-gbr-intl/index.html

Diana would have been gutted. She would be in her third or or fourth marriage to a middle eastern cokehead and Camilla will be Queen consort.

Or maybe she would have married Hasnat Khan, had a few more kids, and reached the point where she no longer feared that she might be killed if the future king of England had non-white, possibly Muslim, siblings.

Hasnat Khan didn’t want to marry Diana.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And when, in the fullness of time, my son Charles becomes King, I know you will give him and his wife Camilla the same support that you have given me; and it is my sincere wish that, when that time comes, Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/05/uk/queen-elizabeth-ii-platinum-jubilee-accession-day-gbr-intl/index.html

Diana would have been gutted. She would be in her third or or fourth marriage to a middle eastern cokehead and Camilla will be Queen consort.

She definitely was on the road to complete train wreck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And when, in the fullness of time, my son Charles becomes King, I know you will give him and his wife Camilla the same support that you have given me; and it is my sincere wish that, when that time comes, Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/05/uk/queen-elizabeth-ii-platinum-jubilee-accession-day-gbr-intl/index.html

Diana would have been gutted. She would be in her third or or fourth marriage to a middle eastern cokehead and Camilla will be Queen consort.

Or maybe she would have married Hasnat Khan, had a few more kids, and reached the point where she no longer feared that she might be killed if the future king of England had non-white, possibly Muslim, siblings.

Hasnat Khan didn’t want to marry Diana.

Can you blame him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Queen should have done what was rumored in the press-- pass over Charles+ the hag in favor of naming Wlls/Kate as the next king/queen.

It's pretty obvious that if Charles had cheated with a beautiful woman, no one would care nearly this much about it.

Doubtful

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I cannot imagine the British public accepting that old hag Camilla after what she did so openly with Charles against the lovely Di. Shame on them. Overdue time to end the monarchy anyway. The British Royal Family is truly dysfunctional.

Queen Elizabeth has given her blessing for Camilla to have the title Queen upon Charles being king. A blessing to her adulterous son and probably blesses her pedophile son.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/05/uk/queen-elizabeth-ii-platinum-jubilee-accession-day-gbr-intl/index.html

Apparently this was a written message and not verbal(???). In her Christmas/New Year address she did not look healthy. If you compare it to last year’s message, she’s lost significant weight in the face. And we know she was hospitalized and sick towards the end of the year. Has the Queen been seen lately? Is she or the firm preparing the public for her demise? When is the last time she was seen in public? Did she write this message or did Charles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Queen should have done what was rumored in the press-- pass over Charles+ the hag in favor of naming Wlls/Kate as the next king/queen.

No. She would have destroyed William and Charles’ relationship. She’s harmed enough relationships and seems to finally have realized she shouldn’t. The concession is longer she remains on the throne, less time time for Charles to be King.

She has to think of what is best for England-- not Charles. Wills + Kate represent the future.

Well she didn’t. Charles will be King.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the way their love story was portrayed in The Crown made people actually like her better, at least in America.

Really? I was neutral about her but the Crown made her seem flaky and callous. She didn’t want to marry Charles but wouldn’t let anyone else have him either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I cannot imagine the British public accepting that old hag Camilla after what she did so openly with Charles against the lovely Di. Shame on them. Overdue time to end the monarchy anyway. The British Royal Family is truly dysfunctional.

Queen Elizabeth has given her blessing for Camilla to have the title Queen upon Charles being king. A blessing to her adulterous son and probably blesses her pedophile son.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/05/uk/queen-elizabeth-ii-platinum-jubilee-accession-day-gbr-intl/index.html

Apparently this was a written message and not verbal(???). In her Christmas/New Year address she did not look healthy. If you compare it to last year’s message, she’s lost significant weight in the face. And we know she was hospitalized and sick towards the end of the year. Has the Queen been seen lately? Is she or the firm preparing the public for her demise? When is the last time she was seen in public? Did she write this message or did Charles?

I would bet this was put forward by Charles. The Queen has never been keen on the whole divorce and adultery thing, being head of the Church of England and all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the way their love story was portrayed in The Crown made people actually like her better, at least in America.

Not this American! She’s a piece of shit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Queen should have done what was rumored in the press-- pass over Charles+ the hag in favor of naming Wlls/Kate as the next king/queen.

No. She would have destroyed William and Charles’ relationship. She’s harmed enough relationships and seems to finally have realized she shouldn’t. The concession is longer she remains on the throne, less time time for Charles to be King.

She has to think of what is best for England-- not Charles. Wills + Kate represent the future.

Most people in Britain don't hate Charles and Camilla, or care enough to be upset. Time heals many wounds.

There's too much what ifs and declarations in this thread. There is no way Charles is not going to be king because that is how it works. As soon as the Queen dies, Charles *is* king. He would have to abdicate. She would not force him to abdicate. Nor is he so unpopular that he would be resented. He has been a superb Prince of Wales in the last 20 years and will be a perfectly good king.

Britain today is not the Britain of the 1990s. The Royal Family has adapted with remarkable speed. Their mistakes can all be traced back to when they were inflexible in the face of changing times - such as finding a wife for Charles. The wife had to be a virgin and a proper aristocrat. The virgin bit was a problem. Who was left? Diana. Charles wasn't allowed to marry the woman he truly loved. Compare that to William's courtship of Kate Middleton. Virginity? Who cared. They lived together before marriage! She's from a pleasant family without aristocratic pretensions or connections. Charles being able to marry Camilla and accepting Camilla into the fold and eventually as future Queen is all part of the adaptations the family has made, and when they have made adaptations, the people are happier. And is key to the survival of the monarchy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And when, in the fullness of time, my son Charles becomes King, I know you will give him and his wife Camilla the same support that you have given me; and it is my sincere wish that, when that time comes, Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/05/uk/queen-elizabeth-ii-platinum-jubilee-accession-day-gbr-intl/index.html

Diana would have been gutted. She would be in her third or or fourth marriage to a middle eastern cokehead and Camilla will be Queen consort.

Camilla the mistress would have never married Charles - Diana would have made sure of it. The fact that he had to wait a further 8 years after her death to be able to marry a woman he'd been tipping since the 70s proves it.

Diana would have been living a glamorous life in New York City and in London just like Jackie Onassis. Charles was being out-maneuvered legally and publicly which is why he gave her $18 million in the divorce and then she was dead a year later.

It’s kinda sweet that you think Diana had power with the royal family. Look at how they cut out an actual king and member of their family and then how Harry and Meghan were cut loose.

Diana was dead to them no matter how much you think she had power. Her worse action was to cross Philip.

A) She didn't cross Phillip - Phillip considered Charles a disgrace and a sniveling coward. He even said in writing "I can't imagine anyone leaving you for Camilla". Charles choices were never his and the father had much better taste.

B) Diana was a daughter of one the oldest families in Britain and the mother of the future King. She wasn't 'dead' to anybody until they put in her in the ground. Before that Charles would have had to share custody, visitation, and all the major ceremonies of William's life with her. Better believe she would have relished that.

Philip famously tried to help her and when she cut off communications with him, he dropped her. He ran the Firm and she strayed away from his authority.

If she was so involved in the life if the future king, why was she on the fourth week away from him when she died? She would have been at his wedding but not near the royal family. She would have also played her card of upstaging the royal family at every event in which William was involved. How long would that play with the public. William also has a wife that outshines Diane in poise and style. Diane’s sisters did not age well. Unless became addicted to plastic surgery as she did to other things, she would not be the 36 year old attractive woman that the paps loved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My opinion is that I’d never take seconds.

Camilla was always first. Diana was the seconds.

Nope. She didn’t get the wedding, the heirs. Always the mistress.

How did that wedding work out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I met Camilla once when I was working with a nonprofit. She was very polite and seemed genuinely interested in our work and knowledgeable about it.

Same here. I didn’t meet Camilla but have worked on one of her literacy patronages. She was very involved and well respected, not because of her place in the royal family but because she really did understand and support the mission. I have also worked with a patronage of the Princess Royal who was equally respected. They do not have a noblesse oblige attitude, but no how to be effective and do the work.

[Anonymous]

What are the odds she abdicates this year?