***I suspect that what's really happening is that, now that Camilla is in a position of power (do you know that she's now the second most senior female in the royal family ater the Queen?!!!), there is a sycophantic swing towards her. So people are quelling their consciences with rationalisations. It's an astonishing display of conscience re-alignment, that should be all to familiar to us on this board.***

It seemed like the minute the happy couple was at the reception, the news readers began gushing over how romantic it was that these two were finally together and how much their relationship had survived over the years.

*Diana* is suddenly being made to sound like the Other Woman. And I'll be this wil only increase in the days to come.

Astonishing indeed.

Lexacon4, ITA.

Mulan

was glad to see the signs the onlookers held...most ws's believe that if they pretend enough, or enough time has passed, that their sin and destruction will be swept under the rug...and it would seem England did not forget.

as for the painting of diana as an ow, I see it as a marketing ploy...if they can get the public to accept her, after a media blitz on their "longtime romance" and how only diana got "in the way" then maybe some hardened hearts would soften...and I have seen this working in some of the responses on MB here to my dismay.

even after losing the weight, placing a designer dress and hat, she is still an adulteress pig in my book. and charles is no better. Like the good book says, if you put pearls on a pig...it's still a pig.

so what can I do about my disapproval? as an american and only of english descent, when I see a poll online, I vote as I see it...negatively. It was hilarious. On aol, the poll about whether her approval rating would climb after the marriage was resounding...majority said no way. And if she should be queen or pass up the title if offered, it was resounding that stateside here, we don't think she should be queen...

In this lifetime, you either make a stand or you do not. You can't make exceptions. You are either in favor of adultery or you are opposed to it. As for me, I have made a very very strong stand in favor of families...of marriages. I do not believe affair marriages are valid. I am sorry, but I do not. Not spiritually anyway. It is also a point I am not willing to debate or discuss incidentally. I am that firm. I do believe in the legality of marriages, hence if affair partners do marry, it is legal though...and there is a huge difference between being valid, morally correct, and legal.

I am just glad both of these two beasts are past their brooding years...one day England will have a handsome king. And that will be a king which came from a broken home...and a home where his mothers' death came as a result of the chain of events sin puts into place. I believe he will carry on and NOT repeat the sins of his father.

Sin such as adultery, or even karma as you may see it, causes a chain of events...and equal and opposite reaction. Kinda like newton's third law. and yes, diana's death came as a result of the chain of events charles put into place. if they were still married, charles ended his affairs, and he worked on reconciliation and helping diana deal with the many demons many of us bs' battle with, she would indeed be alive today. but that is something charles must deal with now.

I am glad I must say that the church made them confess their wickedness...but giving them a blessing still? I am not good with that.

I don't wish charles or camzilla badly. I just don't wish them marital success or popularity. and if somebody asks my opinion, it gives me an opportunity to "proseletize" my opinion about adultery destroying families and that this isn't just an american epidemic...it is worldwide and destroys everything in its path.

can you tell I have pms?

justpeachy, I don't know if you have PMS or not, but I sure love reading your very articulate posts! You are one smart cookie! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I 2nd that thought.... and she is cute to boot. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

As for Charles and his 2nd bride....well let's just say it is disappointing that the church and royalty have become lax. Again this is another sign of the times....

How come his uncle had to give up the throne but Charles gets to keep his status? That one confoozed me. But hey, I'm not royalty, in fact I have just taken a beating on another thread about my beliefs whose very principles are what I use in my daily life and even use here @ MB(let's not discuss that here, just making a statement) so I c/b totally wacky and maybe C/C are doing the current accepable thing. :eek: What is this world coming to?

L.

Well that will be repeating history too.

[color:"brown"]"While Catherine's star faded, the king kissed his mistress publicly and favored her without remorse. The French ambassador believed it was so that "when the grand coup comes, it may not appear strange."

On January 7, 1536, Catherine died at Kimbolton Castle and was buried at Peterborough Abbey with the ceremony due for her position as Princess Dowager, not as a Queen of England. Only in the 20th century would the markings on Catherine's grave be changed to read "Queen of England." [/color] **

Maybe those "Diana club/society" people are correct and need to keep Diana in the public eye so that everything won't be re-written.



** I didn't write any of that, it came from merging two sources:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/sixwives/meet/ca_handbook_fate2.html
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/sixwives/meet/ca_handbook_love3.html
http://tudorhistory.org/aragon/

Diana stuff
http://www.princess-diana.com/diana/diana.html
http://www.bookmice.net/fleur/diana.html

While it does seem that Charles and Camilla's love has with stood the test of time, I find their union very sad. He should have married her years ago before all of the pain and suffering that they caused.

I felt a lot for Diana. I believe that most 19 year old girls believe in the fairytale of love (or at least they did then). She and I were the same age. My heart breaks when every I think of the pain, rejection and disappointment she must have felt when she realized that she was just a pawn. Even before my husband's affair, I could identify with the feeling of hopelessness of loving someone that didn't feel the same for you. I can understand the self destruction that she engaged in (if you believe the stories). She cut herself, became bulemic, engaged in affairs of her own etc...Most of us here can understand all of that. Here she was, one of the lovliest women in the world and the one person that she wanted to adore her, rejected her.

I hate the fact that Charles and Camilla's love for eachother destroyed another human being. How can happiness be born out of the pain of others?

Cathy

Just maybe, Charles has looked up to God and prayed for his forgiveness. Like many other WS's he has had to come to terms with disastrous consequences of his affair. Likewise, perhaps Camilla has repented for her terrible wrong-doings. If we are to forgive adultery in our spouses, shouldn't that forgiveness be extended to others - royal or not royal? I feel quite conflicted about this. tt

[color:"mediumblue"]I agree with you, 'tummytuck'.

It is not our place to forgive or not to forgive them.
That JOB belongs only to God.

Charles and Camilla have been single for many many years.

They have been friends and loved one another for 35 years.

Why shouldn't they spend the rest of their lives together as husband and wife?

Diana had went on with her life and if I recall, was perhaps planning on marrying the man that died when she died in the car accident.

For Charles and Camilla NOT to marry would not bring Diana back.

Charles has waited a long time since his divorce from Diana and later her death, before going ahead with the marriage.

Sincerely, Julie [/color]

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I was just reading the tow board about this. While there is the general "YAY! Camilla finally got her man!" There is also an undercurrent of sympathy for Diana being a victim/pawn or as one put it, the royal "brood mare," and an additional undercurrent that Charles is weak.

Wow, a consensus?!

What is there that is missing here is the general cattiness as to Camilla's looks. (Bravo, who says we are hung up on looks).

I did want to see what they would say because one person there generally says all BW wear granny panties, and that simply could NOT be said about Diana. However they are making much of the fact that she was neurotic. As we know pain, being trapped, depression and disillusionment, etc. will do that to you, especially when you haven't found out much about yourself (what 19 - 21 yo does?)

I just found it interesting that there is some agreement

You might want to read this stuff from the bbc
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4420353.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4429447.stm
(BTW I did love seeing all the hats the women wore and loved the second dress Camilla wore)

But someone needs to give Camilla's daughter tips for standing for photos http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4430437.stm

The media doesn't care about morality. They just care about ratings and sales receipts.

It's no different than here in America. Nobody cares that Humphrey Bogart was cheating on his third wife with Lauren Bacall. Their relationship is still considered one of the greatest romances of the 20th century. His previous wife is just a footnote and her existence (much less her actual name) is often not even acknowledged in many celebrity bios.

Diana will never be just a footnote because she was so famous and well liked. But it is not surprising that the media is kissing up to Camilla. They can't milk Diana's memory forever. They need new headlines, new pictures, and new dirt. Now that Diana is dead she is old news, no matter how beloved she once was.

Well, I was disgusted by the whole thing. Because of their actions, Diana was denied what I believe she truly wanted...to be married to a man who loved and cherished her.

Now, on to the fashion of the day.

Camilla's dresses were fine. I HATED the hats! That big straw hat she wore for the wedding looked like something Cousin Pearl from the Beverly Hillbillies would have made. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> Camilla should use it for parasailing or jumping off a cliff or something!

The crystal-tipped gold-leafed feather abomination made her head look like a huge tumbleweed. Ugh! It looked as if it was made from half of one of those primitive-type twig wreaths that people hang on their walls.

And wasn't Catherine Hepburn the long time mistress of a married man too? I can't remember his name but I think I saw her in an interview where she talked about it.

I can't stomach TV anymore. I just watch movies and don't want to know anything about their personal lives as it really changes my feelings for the actors.

We want to think that people we admire in high profile positions are above all of this, and it's upsetting to find out they are even less so than the rest of us.

When people like Mel Gibson, John Travolta and Will Smith who are very much married and devoted to their families resist the temptation to cheat it makes such a statement because they are so rare.

And I use to be a big fan of Sting but found out he left his wife for his neighbor and now I can hardly stomach him either. I now admire musicians who remain faithful to their families for that reason more than for their talents. How odd, eh?

As far as celebrities go I heard someone say that it used to be people became famous because of their specialness/talents, now they are simply special because of their celebrity status.

In other words they used to become famous because they were special, now they are special because they are famous.

And the public puts them on that pedestal.

Unlike C&C who were born into their positions. From what others here have written about his ancestry, his appalling weakness is not so much an accident of birth, but a continuation of a long line of weakness which a few managed to overcome, like his mother.

The media sucks up to royalty on occasion, and this thing reeked of Royal SPIN. They limited crowd participation to those members of the general public who could suck up their feelings about Diana and cheer on this sham.

I read one commentary where Camilla was dreading the "face the public" kind of thing - perhaps knowing that even a lady of grace like Diana struggled with the "public" face required of royals - and that she's a royal hack and an imposter gave Diana a bit of justice on Saturday.

Oh - and the romance thing? Looked like something they were reading off of a press release!

***And wasn't Catherine Hepburn the long time mistress of a married man too? I can't remember his name but I think I saw her in an interview where she talked about it.***

Yes, Kat had a very long affair with Spencer Tracy. His Catholic wife refused to divorce him even as he and Katherine played house. At least KH stayed home from his funeral -- out of "respect" for his wife, she said. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

***I can't stomach TV anymore. I just watch movies and don't want to know anything about their personal lives as it really changes my feelings for the actors.
We want to think that people we admire in high profile positions are above all of this, and it's upsetting to find out they are even less so than the rest of us.***

It's a massive sense of entitlement combined with loads of opportunity. Hollywood is just like normal life, only on steroids.

***When people like Mel Gibson, John Travolta and Will Smith who are very much married and devoted to their families resist the temptation to cheat it makes such a statement because they are so rare.***

Hate to burst yer bubble, but:

There have been stories about Mel Gibson's infidelities for years. I have never so much as seen a photo of his wife. I don't think she's ever appeared in public with him.

There have been stories and rumors for many years about how Travolta is gay and is marriage is just a cover.

Will Smith and his wife Jada recently started talking about how they have an "open marriage" arrangement. No, I'm not kidding. I believe they first brought this out on the *Oprah* show.

***And I use to be a big fan of Sting but found out he left his wife for his neighbor and now I can hardly stomach him either. I now admire musicians who remain faithful to their families for that reason more than for their talents. How odd, eh?***

Not at all -- and you know who, by all accounts, is a great husband and dad? My own fav performer, "Weird Al" Yankovic! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

***Unlike C&C who were born into their positions.***

Well, Camilla was not born into royalty -- she got there by other means -- <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

***From what others here have written about his ancestry, his appalling weakness is not so much an accident of birth, but a continuation of a long line of weakness which a few managed to overcome, like his mother.***

The Windsors are known for producing strong women and weak men. Ya know who needs to be next in line? Princess Anne. Now, there's someone who would take very good care of England!
Mulan

OH MY! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />
(well not really shocked)

Early romance of Charles and Camilla to be made into film

1 hour, 39 minutes ago Entertainment - AFP

LONDON (AFP) - You've seen Prince Charles and Camilla being wed on television. Now you can catch their early romance on film, in a one-off special catapulting the middle-aged British couple back 34 years in time.

Britain's ITV television channel said Monday it was currently casting actors for a two-hour dramatization of the first meeting and early relationship between Britain's heir to the throne and Camilla Parker Bowles, then known by her maiden name Camilla Shand.

But the film will end at Charles's 1981 marriage to then Lady Diana Spencer, without going into lurid but little-known details about how he and Camilla, sometime in the late 1980s and while still married to others, rekindled their romance.

The film is to be entitled "Whatever Love Means" -- quoting Charles's response to the press when he was asked earlier this year whether he loved Camilla.

The couple married on Saturday in a modest civil ceremony in Windsor, west of London, followed by a religious service and reception attended by hundreds including celebrities and royals at Queen Elizabeth II's Windsor Castle.

A spokeswoman at Granada, the ITV franchise producing the film, told AFP the drama would focus on "why they fell in love so deeply" and recount their "passionate relationship up to his marriage".

"For the moment we've decided to concentrate on the early years," she said when asked why the work did not cover the period of their affairs and their live-in companionship in later life, saying that was "not for the telling in this particular film".

Charles and Camilla, then in their early 20s, met for the first time at a polo match in Windsor, and they later became close, spending time at the prince's private apartments in Buckingham Palace.

However, after Charles joined the Royal Navy and was posted abroad, Camilla lost hope he would propose and married army officer Andrew Parker Bowles in 1973.

The couple, who have two children, were divorced in 1995.

Charles and Princess Diana separated in 1992 and were divorced four years later. Diana died in a car crash in 1997 in Paris.

"Whatever Love Means" will film for five weeks in Dublin beginning in May, and is scheduled for broadcast in Britain later this year at an unspecified date, ITV said.

story on yahoo

Mulan you did burst my bubble. And about the guys I thought were so cool too! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

See you can tell I don't watch TV or read the news, I am truly clueless.

But Travolta being gay and his marriage a sham????

NO WAY! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Okay I think this will be my last post on this subject. I just had to go look something up and it's too wierd, sorted and you almost need a score card to keep track of all the players:

Camilla's full maiden name is; Camilla Rosemary Shand

Diana's mother Frances divorces her father in 1969 (Diana is 5/6) running off to marry wallpaper tycoon Peter Shand Kydd, I guess we can assume an affair there.

There is a wicked custody battle and Frances looses custody.

It is from this that friend say Diana was determind to be married for life. So much so that she may have had blinders on and too much into the romantic side of things. But it does point that she really beleived that Charles was marrying her out of love.

Previously Charles had dated Diana's older sister Sarah. And it is said that Camilla encouraged him to marry Diana (alterior motives? maybe they both saw her as young, gullible and blinded by romantic dreams, who knows)

Andrew Parker Bowles
Earlier in the 1970s he was Colonel Commanding the Household Cavalry and Silver Stick in Waiting to Queen Elizabeth II.

My mind is playing all sorts of games with this one (given that Andrew seems to like to give his to many other women) .. what is a Silver Stick in Waiting?

One of Diana's flatmates (pre Charles and when they got engaged) was named "Virginia Pitman." Months after Camilla's and Andrew's divorce is final he marries his "long time companion" Virginia Pitman. The same one perhaps? The mind reels.

1994, June = Prince Charles admits infidelity during a television interview with Jonathan Dimbleby. In Dimbleby's print biography, Charles concedes he was bullied into the marriage by his father. (at 33 he had no cajones)

He also says that he will never marry again.

Charles put his wedding ring (to Camilla) on his left little finger. (Why?)

When Diana married Charles she was 20, he was 34.

One of my favorite quotes:
"I found myself less angry with Camilla and more angry with Charles. Why didn't he have the royal balls to marry Camilla in the first place -- back in the early 1970s, when they dated?"


Places where I got this info, and more:
http://www.ctv.ca/generic/WebSpecials/royal_wedding/camilla.html
http://www.bbcamerica.com/britain/princess_diana/princess_diana_biography.jsp
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3642707.stm

http://worldroots.com/brigitte/diana3.htm
http://www.answers.com
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksea...displayonly=EXC

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/text/2002237053_royalwed10.html

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/lifestyle/219232_camillacon08.html