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