AIBU to think they are over-egging the pudding a bit with Camilla's latest "rehabilitation"?

[Limecoconutice]

I know this isn't AiBU but I am interested in the view of both royalists and republicans. (I am somewhere in the middle, veering towards republicanism.)

Fair enough the Queen declaring officially that Camilla will be Queen when Charles inherits the throne. I reluctantly concede that she has proved herself, doing the job of royal consort reasonably well, with well chosen causes, and I don't envy her having to take on the role of Queen consort at an age when most people are winding down and enjoying life a bit. It's a big commitment. Ditto the induction in to the Order of the Garter. I don't pretend to understand the significance of that but it is obviously meaningful to the RF.

But this latest video of her saying her parents taught her to be "considerate of others" is kind of ignoring the elephant in the room? Yes it was a long time ago, yes both Charles and Diana came from dysfunctional backgrounds and had unreasonable outside pressures put upon them, and yes Diana had affairs too, but I still think it takes a particularly hard sort of person to pursue an extra marital relationship so relentlessly when there are young children involved? Not very "considerate" in my view! Any decent or honourable person would have stepped back, moved abroad, absented themselves and she did none of those things. She bought a house close to Highgrove fhs! And it's fairly apparent that the ripple effect of the devastation caused is still being felt today (Harry etc) despite everyone's best efforts to make it appear as if it's been smoothed over!

Call me old-fashioned, but my view is that you can have all the beauty treatments and cosmetic dentistry and procedures you like in New York, and all the couture outfits and hats made for you in London, and Elizabeth II's approval, and the Order of the Garter bestowed upon you, but that doesn't make you an honourable person! But maybe my mistake is thinking that any of the RF should be more honourable than the average person? But I kind of think that to do the job well, you have to be nowadays! Maybe before press intrusion and mobile phone cameras and TV news, you could play the role of King or Queen and be a different person in your private life, but nowadays , with such an intense spotlight on you, you have to be the real article! I am just not convinced that Camilla, or Charles for that matter (who doesn't get to shake off responsibility for his role in the Diana debacle either) quite cut it!

Anyone else (who can be bothered to care) feel the same way?

I live near to Highgrove my ex was royal protection Charles bought Highgrove to be close to Rays Mill where Camilla lived still a lot of anger here regarding Diana’s expenditure

This .

Bread and circuses.

Still so many people ( generally older people ) led by the nose and manipulated by the royal machine .

Young people do not show anywhere near the same level of support . There will be lots of reasons for this but not being led solely by a monolithic UK media must be part of it .

i am the same age as Diana and I can assure you that no one called me a "very young girl" at that age lol. there was a lot wrong with what went on, but calling a woman that is odd.

Has anyone else seen that Tiggy Legge-Bourke is being paid damages by the BBC because of the slanderous lies about her Martin Bashir made up to get Diana to agree to an interview with him.

This included false accusations that she was having an affair with Prince Charles and a falsified receipt for an abortion in her name.

Which only goes the show how false the narrative about PC/ Diana marriage was. Demonstrably in almost all cases jouro fantasty concocted for sales/ ratings.

I would also point out that the people lapping up these lies and promoting them are dong nothing to sustain the memory of Princess Diana. All you are doing is repeating the lies spread during her lifetime to torture her. And supporting the industry that is ultimately responsible for her death. She refused official protection because she though they were reporting back on her to the Queen- a paranoia fed by the papers and specifically Martin Bashir.

Charles and Camilla did have an affair though when he was married to Diana. Even they admit it. What is under dispute is when it started.

I’m not disputing that @antelopevalley

What I am saying is that we will never know the truth and accepting gossip as fact is a bit silly. The truth is often much more mundane that the headlines. Newspapers aren’t interested in truth- they’re interested in selling papers.

The truth is often more mundane? I am not sure that is true. Most of the press cover mundane facts about the Royal Family such as what dress Catherine is wearing or a joke the Queen made.
When the truth is a lot of lobbying to exempt themselves from laws, refusing to co-operate with the police over wildlife crimes and Andrew, dodgy financial dealings re. Charles and Andrew, Charles friendships with paedophiles. The truth is there is a lot of serious dirt that rarely gets mentioned in mainstream papers and news.

And I can provide links showing all the above is true.

Literally couldn’t give a fuck. Diana had affairs
charles had affairs
charles brother is a nonce
theyre all still richer than me and everyone around me
couldnt care less about the specifics of who did what, I presume they’re all terrible people that we the peasant townsfolk must for some reason still continue to hand over our gold coins to

Has anyone said "She'd be fun to have a G&T with" yet - as if that really matters?

If we have to consider the ghastly woman at all, the bit that sticks in my throat is her emphasis on the importance of "family values". A bit rich coming from someone who's made the choices she has, but there you go

Yes, they have.

But in my case it was within the context of her having the drink with her friends. I think she would be fun.

However, in my mind she’s a cheat and a liar and I won’t ever change my mind on that.

There's footage of Diana talking about how she confronted them over the affair so it's straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

Absolutely @antelopevalley

I find it so so odd on here that MNers... a bright bunch of people who generally care, are more concerned with whether Meghan was grinning in church, or has William got a temper... than these important actions that the RF gets away with.

I linked this a few days ago somewhere (can't remember which thread) and it just went by unnoticed. The fact the Queen has exempted herself from 160 laws that we all have to abide by.

Environmental pollution, wildlife offences, workers' rights, anti discrimination laws and more.

Do we care?
It seems not

@Roussette I so agree. And my post about how wildlife laws have been broken a number of times on the Sandringham Estate but the police could not get access to investigate as they need permission from the Royal Family, got a few comments. The breaking of laws included the illegal shooting of birds of prey and illegal storage of toxic chemicals leading to a protected bird of prey being poisoned. These are serious wildlife offences, but the police could not investigate properly.
But a post about a dress a Royal wore, or whether a Royal is too slim, gets lots and lots of comments. These things really do not matter except to the individuals. Breaking laws and nothing happening, and being exempt from many more laws, really matters.
Even Charles support to a convicted paedophile has not had that much press coverage. So even their negative behaviour is not criticised that much.

And the tax exemptions, let's not forget that too.

Sealed Wills also. But this is being challenged at the moment. Keeping their Wills secret goes back to 1911. It's about time that changed. The Guardian is challenging a judicial decision to exclude the media from the secret hearing that led to a ruling last year to close Prince Philip’s will.

(Before anyone says that a member of the general public can seal their will... yes you can, but it is extremely complex and costly. The RF do it as a matter of course)

Anyway, back to Camilla, I'll get told off for derailing in a minute

I saw that Guardian case in the newspaper this morning. I thought the Judge had agreed the hearing should not have been held in secret?

Very much agree. The amount of legislation the Queen has got out of because of her position is rarely mentioned, and when it is few seem to care.

And as for William and Kate. She's never done a day's work in her life and he went off shagging her supposed good pal!

The whole thing is just spin and PR so that they can continue their tax payer funded lifestyles, and wheel themselves out every now and again to let us see them "working".

It's a total mystery to me why they have so much support amongst the populace.

Camilla is getting more good PR recently because the Queen will die soon and she'll be Charles' Queen Consort.

I think it's a smoke and mirrors operation .
Let the plebs argue among themselves over daily mail royal gossip while they ( royals ) get on with doing whatever the hell they like over much more serious issues ( Andrew's friends , charles and money , queenie changing bills to suit herself )

This sort of thing gets overlooked:

amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jul/20/prince-charles-no-inquiry-into-3m-cash-donations-to-his-charity

I do not understand why there is not going to be an enquiry!

There's never an enquiry. It's all ridiculous.

When the Queen goes, the Press will not be so forgiving and so deferential, I don't think.

Not a royalist.

To me Diana was used as a breeding machine.

All this talk about Charles couldn't this,
couldn't that due to duties.

Why didn't he give up his title and piss off with Camilla ?

Looks like they both got what they wanted in the end. Regardless of the cost to others.

I hope you are right. They need to be properly accountable and that starts with following the laws of the land.

The fervent speculations of the Crown and its fans are far more interesting than the reality.

I've never watched it.

What's it about?