Anonymous wrote:A horrible king since he’s a horrible person.

When Diana died there was pretty all food press about her. Then a couple of years before Charles and Camilla were public and getting married, nasty stories about her were being leaked. So the Palace protected her until Charles life was more important. Make Diana look bad and a more favorable view of Camilla. Sad. It’s no wonder Harry doesn’t trust the Palace.

And if Diana were alive today, would Charles had been allowed to marry Camilla? Probably not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m betting he’s gone before coronation.

What do you think needs to happen first to realize this? Lay out the steps in the process....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charles is going to be terrible. It’s a shame because I think he is much more competent and intelligent than his sons. But his people skills are terrible and he has already gotten in trouble for being political with those letters mentioning Israel.

How so?

The sons seem way more emotionally intelligent, socially skilled and articulate to me in what ways do you think they they lack intelligence and competence?

Charles is better educated, more intelligent, hardworking and shrewd businessman than his sons. You are right that he has little self awareness, but he is basically the poster boy for complex childhood trauma and attachment issues. There is a picture of his parents returning from an extended tour shaking little Charles hand, as the queen then goes on to embraces her mother. Heartbreaking and humiliating for a young boy to experience.

I think he will be an eccentric king and will do things his way.

Ok thanks … so much of the lead royal job seems to be pageantry PR, social skills and appealing character - William definitely seems better suited to it EQ wise.

To your point though, capacity for intellectual intelligence is allegedly passed down through the mother (according to science I have read). I wonder whether Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was markedly more intelligent than Princess Diana? That would be a wonder given royal inbreeding….

Diana was intelligent?

I thought she had some kind of undiagnosed learning disorder and that's why she didn't do great in school???

Much more is known about learning differences these days - they often come with great strengths outside the classroom (creativity, lateral thinking, out of the box problem solving but also greater difficulties with emotional regulation/ anxiety and depression). I think we saw that with Diana / highly sensitive but also gifted with connecting with people in deeply human ways).

The Diana worship on this board is so odd. I think she seemed like a really nice person and also one who genuinely liked and got along with kids and had good fashion sense. I feel like the first of those two describes at least half of the women I know. The fact that it was relatively unique in British royals is what is striking. She was not smart and had bad judgment in a lot of ways. That’s okay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m betting he’s gone before coronation.

What do you think needs to happen first to realize this? Lay out the steps in the process....

Lol, fan fic indeed!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m betting he’s gone before coronation.

What do you think needs to happen first to realize this? Lay out the steps in the process....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charles is going to be terrible. It’s a shame because I think he is much more competent and intelligent than his sons. But his people skills are terrible and he has already gotten in trouble for being political with those letters mentioning Israel.

How so?

The sons seem way more emotionally intelligent, socially skilled and articulate to me in what ways do you think they they lack intelligence and competence?

Charles is better educated, more intelligent, hardworking and shrewd businessman than his sons. You are right that he has little self awareness, but he is basically the poster boy for complex childhood trauma and attachment issues. There is a picture of his parents returning from an extended tour shaking little Charles hand, as the queen then goes on to embraces her mother. Heartbreaking and humiliating for a young boy to experience.

I think he will be an eccentric king and will do things his way.

Ok thanks … so much of the lead royal job seems to be pageantry PR, social skills and appealing character - William definitely seems better suited to it EQ wise.

To your point though, capacity for intellectual intelligence is allegedly passed down through the mother (according to science I have read). I wonder whether Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was markedly more intelligent than Princess Diana? That would be a wonder given royal inbreeding….

Diana was intelligent?

I thought she had some kind of undiagnosed learning disorder and that's why she didn't do great in school???

Much more is known about learning differences these days - they often come with great strengths outside the classroom (creativity, lateral thinking, out of the box problem solving but also greater difficulties with emotional regulation/ anxiety and depression). I think we saw that with Diana / highly sensitive but also gifted with connecting with people in deeply human ways).

The Diana worship on this board is so odd. I think she seemed like a really nice person and also one who genuinely liked and got along with kids and had good fashion sense. I feel like the first of those two describes at least half of the women I know. The fact that it was relatively unique in British royals is what is striking. She was not smart and had bad judgment in a lot of ways. That’s okay.

Anonymous wrote:I’m betting he’s gone before coronation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:U.K. is waking up hard damn.

Protest is a sign of a healthy country. You might want to look outside as G7 leaders meet for real protests

You haven’t seen what a true protest looks like because your King and his family flee to private palaces in the country while the nation starves. Remind you of another moment in history?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is unsuitable and has NPD. He was not given the crown by his mother who found him unsuitable and so she ruled until she died.

The person who should be the monarch is Princess Anne, but whatever... Monarchy should be dismantled and I am thrilled that Charles is the king. Hopefully, he will prove to be the last nail in the coffin.

Agree about Princess Anne. She would have whipped a Biro from her pocket and signed the damn document. Then she would have rearranged the desk and gotten on with it.

Charles is a big baby, but he’s right, those pens leak every time. And you know they have the most expensive (which doesn’t guarantee quality). They need to switch to Montblanc ballpoint.

Charles is going to get that monarchy abolished in T-10 days.

Are you the same one who said Charles would never be king?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is unsuitable and has NPD. He was not given the crown by his mother who found him unsuitable and so she ruled until she died.

The person who should be the monarch is Princess Anne, but whatever... Monarchy should be dismantled and I am thrilled that Charles is the king. Hopefully, he will prove to be the last nail in the coffin.

Agree about Princess Anne. She would have whipped a Biro from her pocket and signed the damn document. Then she would have rearranged the desk and gotten on with it.

Charles is a big baby, but he’s right, those pens leak every time. And you know they have the most expensive (which doesn’t guarantee quality). They need to switch to Montblanc ballpoint.

Charles is going to get that monarchy abolished in T-10 days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charles is going to be terrible. It’s a shame because I think he is much more competent and intelligent than his sons. But his people skills are terrible and he has already gotten in trouble for being political with those letters mentioning Israel.

How so?

The sons seem way more emotionally intelligent, socially skilled and articulate to me in what ways do you think they they lack intelligence and competence?

Charles is better educated, more intelligent, hardworking and shrewd businessman than his sons. You are right that he has little self awareness, but he is basically the poster boy for complex childhood trauma and attachment issues. There is a picture of his parents returning from an extended tour shaking little Charles hand, as the queen then goes on to embraces her mother. Heartbreaking and humiliating for a young boy to experience.

I think he will be an eccentric king and will do things his way.

Ok thanks … so much of the lead royal job seems to be pageantry PR, social skills and appealing character - William definitely seems better suited to it EQ wise.

To your point though, capacity for intellectual intelligence is allegedly passed down through the mother (according to science I have read). I wonder whether Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was markedly more intelligent than Princess Diana? That would be a wonder given royal inbreeding….

Diana was intelligent?

I thought she had some kind of undiagnosed learning disorder and that's why she didn't do great in school???

Much more is known about learning differences these days - they often come with great strengths outside the classroom (creativity, lateral thinking, out of the box problem solving but also greater difficulties with emotional regulation/ anxiety and depression). I think we saw that with Diana / highly sensitive but also gifted with connecting with people in deeply human ways).