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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:London papers report Londoners are split about the Queen's decision on Camilla.

Well no shit. Queen Ho is not something people are just going to 'get used to' because Charles whined about it. I look forward to the rumblings growing louder. Especially since the public just found out that this announcement has been in the works for FIVE YEARS while Charles was tut-tutting and protesting he wasn't even thinking about it the whole time.

Camilla probably doesn't give a royal sh*t if she becomes the Queen Consort. The Queen and the Firm probably care because they want to introduce a commoner-- albeit one with a bit of a royal pedigree--into the line before the bog standard commoner, Kate Middleton, becomes Queen Consort to William.

Oh please. Camilla stuck around like a rottweiler for 40 years and then 7 years post his wife's death to get that wife certificate. Then their lackeys let it be known that Charles was miserable not being to call his wife Princess of Wales and wouldn't go into his reign without his 'Queen Consort'. Whining POS.

I'll give her her due - you never once heard her publicly, or through 'friends', complain that she wasn't known as Princess of Wales. She knew she'd be crucified if that came out or 'the boys' publicly came out against her as a sob story. Instead Charles treats his children as basically step kids, holidays and vacations only with Camilla, does the occasional photoshoot with the grandkids and that's only after years of begging, and has his mistress by his side. Kind of like Boris and Carrie Ho - have you seen his 6 older kids with him since late 2019? That would be a no. He even almost died and they were nowhere to be seen and for good reason.

Since you obviously know their intimate dynamic, when you have dinner at BP next, can you post the menu here? TIA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:London papers report Londoners are split about the Queen's decision on Camilla.

Well no shit. Queen Ho is not something people are just going to 'get used to' because Charles whined about it. I look forward to the rumblings growing louder. Especially since the public just found out that this announcement has been in the works for FIVE YEARS while Charles was tut-tutting and protesting he wasn't even thinking about it the whole time.

Camilla probably doesn't give a royal sh*t if she becomes the Queen Consort. The Queen and the Firm probably care because they want to introduce a commoner-- albeit one with a bit of a royal pedigree--into the line before the bog standard commoner, Kate Middleton, becomes Queen Consort to William.

Oh please. Camilla stuck around like a rottweiler for 40 years and then 7 years post his wife's death to get that wife certificate. Then their lackeys let it be known that Charles was miserable not being to call his wife Princess of Wales and wouldn't go into his reign without his 'Queen Consort'. Whining POS.

I'll give her her due - you never once heard her publicly, or through 'friends', complain that she wasn't known as Princess of Wales. She knew she'd be crucified if that came out or 'the boys' publicly came out against her as a sob story. Instead Charles treats his children as basically step kids, holidays and vacations only with Camilla, does the occasional photoshoot with the grandkids and that's only after years of begging, and has his mistress by his side. Kind of like Boris and Carrie Ho - have you seen his 6 older kids with him since late 2019? That would be a no. He even almost died and they were nowhere to be seen and for good reason.

Since you obviously know their intimate dynamic, when you have dinner at BP next, can you post the menu here? TIA.

I don't keep up with them now - they were far more interesting when Charles was flying out Camilla out on royal tours with her husband and fondling her under the table. Now they're positively boring by that standard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Khan dropped her and Diana embarrassed herself by throwing herself at him. In fact he returned to Pakistan so that he would not be involved in the drama after Diana’s death. He also said he would not marry her because of cultural differences. He respected her charitable work snd probably thought it was fun to boff her, but she would never be his wife. You have little understanding of the Middle Eastern male mind if you think most Muslim men would want to procreate with Diana. She had her virgin moment with Charles and was not recreating it for a Muslim man.

Don't be silly. Thousands of Middle Eastern men have married and procreated with Western women.

Commoners, of course. But not someone of Diana’s standing and certainly not Khan who married and divorced one young woman and is now married to another young woman. At 36, Diana was over her sale by date for Khan.

You ought to make up your mind whether she was too blue-blood OR too old for him OR it was cultural differences.

And Dodi would have married her in a hot minute if she was willing. Dodi, whose billionaire father married a Finnish woman and had four kids with her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Time to move on, she deserves her place. She works hard, doesn’t complain and it’s down to earth ( as much as possible in her position ).

I do enjoy Tracey Ullman's version of Camilla. If I had got to have a G&T with a royal family member, Camilla would be high up on the list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if they will give back the Elgin Marbles and the Koh-i-Noor diamond. British people used to be such savages.

You do understand that the Elgin Marbles were made by slave labor and the Koh--Noor diamond was mined by slave labor. Don't get all sniffy on the Brits until you see the savagery of the Greeks and Indians.

I'm part Greek and I disagree. We brought so much value to the humanity and we were never such large scale invaders like British.

Im eating Greek food for dinner and I think you should revisit the history of slavery in ancient times.

Of course you do. Anglo Saxons had to take others' masterpieces and food, as both their food and visual arts are incredibly s*itty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:London papers report Londoners are split about the Queen's decision on Camilla.

There was polling in this last year. “In June last year the Daily Express commissioned a poll of the British public - not the paper’s readers - and found 63 per cent of Britons opposed to Camilla becoming Queen. A YouGov poll last year found only 13 per cent wanted Camilla to be Queen.”
Good thread here:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Time to move on, she deserves her place. She works hard, doesn’t complain and it’s down to earth ( as much as possible in her position ).

Disagree. She’s indiscrete and a gossip. Supposedly Biden farted in her presence and she flapped her gums about it so much it made it into the papers. He’s an old man grow up.

[Anonymous]

The Queen bows to her boys wishes. Of course they believe they can do what they want to women and get away with it. Shame on here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:London papers report Londoners are split about the Queen's decision on Camilla.

There was polling in this last year. “In June last year the Daily Express commissioned a poll of the British public - not the paper’s readers - and found 63 per cent of Britons opposed to Camilla becoming Queen. A YouGov poll last year found only 13 per cent wanted Camilla to be Queen.”
Good thread here:

Makes sense. I'm a little confused at why the ROTA is confused here.

These people watched, and helped Charles, cover up an affair for his whole marriage. The entire 90s the ROTA was 'Camilla WHO'.

Now you're surprised the palace 'reneged' on a commitment to the public. That is what they do while gaslighting you to believe they hadn't made the commitment in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Queen bows to her boys wishes. Of course they believe they can do what they want to women and get away with it. Shame on here.

Oh come on, that's not fair. Edward is innocent in this and Anne is well known to have had a long-standing affair with Camilla's husband (yes, look it up). If you want to get away with something in the royal family - its an equal opportunity fest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:London papers report Londoners are split about the Queen's decision on Camilla.

Well no shit. Queen Ho is not something people are just going to 'get used to' because Charles whined about it. I look forward to the rumblings growing louder. Especially since the public just found out that this announcement has been in the works for FIVE YEARS while Charles was tut-tutting and protesting he wasn't even thinking about it the whole time.

Camilla probably doesn't give a royal sh*t if she becomes the Queen Consort. The Queen and the Firm probably care because they want to introduce a commoner-- albeit one with a bit of a royal pedigree--into the line before the bog standard commoner, Kate Middleton, becomes Queen Consort to William.

Oh please. Camilla stuck around like a rottweiler for 40 years and then 7 years post his wife's death to get that wife certificate. Then their lackeys let it be known that Charles was miserable not being to call his wife Princess of Wales and wouldn't go into his reign without his 'Queen Consort'. Whining POS.

I'll give her her due - you never once heard her publicly, or through 'friends', complain that she wasn't known as Princess of Wales. She knew she'd be crucified if that came out or 'the boys' publicly came out against her as a sob story. Instead Charles treats his children as basically step kids, holidays and vacations only with Camilla, does the occasional photoshoot with the grandkids and that's only after years of begging, and has his mistress by his side. Kind of like Boris and Carrie Ho - have you seen his 6 older kids with him since late 2019? That would be a no. He even almost died and they were nowhere to be seen and for good reason.

DP. I believe this though. Charles is a snob and probably can’t deal with his wife not being called the Queen. It’s kind of pathetic because she wouldn’t even be with him if her husband didn’t eff Princess Anne.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if they will give back the Elgin Marbles and the Koh-i-Noor diamond. British people used to be such savages.

You do understand that the Elgin Marbles were made by slave labor and the Koh--Noor diamond was mined by slave labor. Don't get all sniffy on the Brits until you see the savagery of the Greeks and Indians.

I'm part Greek and I disagree. We brought so much value to the humanity and we were never such large scale invaders like British.

Im eating Greek food for dinner and I think you should revisit the history of slavery in ancient times.

Of course you do. Anglo Saxons had to take others' masterpieces and food, as both their food and visual arts are incredibly s*itty.

I'm not PP, but whoah. Ok, first of all, where the ancient world is concerned:
and


Seriously, well before classical times Asia Minor was basically colonized by Greeks. And my people are still really sore about this little old thing:

Regarding food, I have noticed... remarkable similarities between Greek food and the cuisine of the Ottoman lands. Hmmm. Granted, there certainly are differences. But also... more than a couple of similarities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if they will give back the Elgin Marbles and the Koh-i-Noor diamond. British people used to be such savages.

You do understand that the Elgin Marbles were made by slave labor and the Koh--Noor diamond was mined by slave labor. Don't get all sniffy on the Brits until you see the savagery of the Greeks and Indians.

I'm part Greek and I disagree. We brought so much value to the humanity and we were never such large scale invaders like British.

Im eating Greek food for dinner and I think you should revisit the history of slavery in ancient times.

Of course you do. Anglo Saxons had to take others' masterpieces and food, as both their food and visual arts are incredibly s*itty.

I'm not PP, but whoah. Ok, first of all, where the ancient world is concerned:
and


Seriously, well before classical times Asia Minor was basically colonized by Greeks. And my people are still really sore about this little old thing:

Regarding food, I have noticed... remarkable similarities between Greek food and the cuisine of the Ottoman lands. Hmmm. Granted, there certainly are differences. But also... more than a couple of similarities.

When the Greeks created the Parthenon, when Phidias did Zeus at Olympia and started the classical Greek movement, when Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle wrote fundamental pieces that influence the Western culture even today, the what are now Anglo Saxons were probably still trying to evolve from brontosauruses. Give them back, not yours. Your culture was not able to create these masterpieces. I mean, you couldn't even freaking create one single valuable item to trade with China. You had to make an entire country addicted to drugs in order to buy luxury goods. When you got to Jamestown, you had to eat your own to survive. The entire royal family's fortune is all bloody and you are all brutes and cannibals. Also, your food is horrific.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Queen bows to her boys wishes. Of course they believe they can do what they want to women and get away with it. Shame on here.

Oh come on, that's not fair. Edward is innocent in this and Anne is well known to have had a long-standing affair with Camilla's husband (yes, look it up). If you want to get away with something in the royal family - its an equal opportunity fest.

LOL! Based on The Crown and DailyMail, all fictional!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Queen bows to her boys wishes. Of course they believe they can do what they want to women and get away with it. Shame on here.

Oh come on, that's not fair. Edward is innocent in this and Anne is well known to have had a long-standing affair with Camilla's husband (yes, look it up). If you want to get away with something in the royal family - its an equal opportunity fest.

LOL! Based on The Crown and DailyMail, all fictional!

Ummm no.

He’s well known as her lover through the decades and she’s made no attempt to hide it - why should she when everyone else had their boy toys including her Aunt Margaret?