Posted on 04/09/2005 8:28:47 AM PDT by cynblogger
You two seem to have forgotten that your precious Diana was a slut.
If she became a slut, it was about the time Diana got fed up with Claptrap Charlie's continual adultery with the mutt who is a very conniving whore that's going to become queen. Claptrap Charlie and his spin people's job now is to convince the Brits that his love for his whore was a fairy tale in itself. What a crock of sh*t!
I saw this on another thread and thought it fit perfectly.
You are indeed wise, clearbluesky.
"What goes around, comes around. Wait and see.
My grandmother used to say- " The mills of God grind slow, but exceedingly fine."
Those who keep comparing Diana's affairs ,AFTER she realized her marriage was a farce, to this long-standing mistress of Chuck's are intentionally missing the point.
A naive, probably star-struck, young girl went into a marriage believing it was forever. She probably even loved Charles in the beginning. He was NEVER committed to Diana. While they were engaged, he had Camilla on a train waiting somewhere. It's one thing to lose your husband's affections during a marriage, quite another to learn you never had them at all and had been USED.
A man who openly flaunted a mistress before-and during- a marriage, would certainly have had no problem treating his wife callously after she had fulfilled her 'purpose'.
Diana was USED, and no doubt told she had been. Should she have committed adultery too? No. Was she driven to her emotional problems by mental and emotional abuse? I will always believe so.
Just as I will always believe that Charles and/or the Queen arranged a 'terrible accident' to rid themselves of a too-popular Princess.
Wait and see how such deeds are repaid"
Tuffydoodle, there is nothing in that post that I really disagree with. Diana was young and naive and I'm sure she thought that she had achieved every little girl's fairy tale dream.
I do not disagree that Charles used her.
But, what I do have a problem with is the Diana worship and the hatefulness that people have been expressing towards this wedding.
The comments are all a variation on the same theme. People make remarks about the "adulterers" are getting married.
Well, fine, that is true, but regardless of the reason, Diana was an adulterer as well. She slept with more people than Charles did in fact.
She broke up two marriages and one engagement, but people still spout the poor pity Diana lines.
Diana was an adulterer. Diana was a nutcase and Diana was a violent woman.
She was dangerous.
"But, what I do have a problem with is the Diana worship and the hatefulness that people have been expressing towards this wedding."
Calling Diana a slut is also hateful. Can't eat your cake and have it, too.
Maybe it is hateful. But at least I'm being fair and saying they were both horrible people.
Given your screen name, your attitude to Royal Mistresses is a tad ironic
"The royal thing just gets weirderer and weirderer............."
It does happen; when I was a minor living with my mother and step-father (AD AF) overseas, my father would stay with us when he visited. Sometimes, with time, divorcees manage to get along reasonably well when forced to due to children.
"Is that what your mother taught you? To go out in public and point and laugh and jeer at people you don't think are cute enough -- or young enough? You're lucky I am not your mother, that's all."
I agree with your sentiments and will add that none of the posters know the first thing about these people personally. Obviously he wants to marry her. Why shouldn't he?
Judging by what I have seen and heard in my offices over he last 30 years, the adulterous man leaving his wife for another woman is the most common form of marriage in America. Both my choirmaster at St. Phillips Church in Atlanta and the President of the Bible college where I attended for 3 years abandoned their wives of many years and at least four children to run off with young trophy sluts, both citing "true love" and leaving their wives and children publically humiliated in their wake. Probably half to three quarters of the men and women on this board are divorced, and a number of you were divorced due to adultery. The only difference between you and the Royal Family is that there were no television cameras pointed at you.
Well, woooop - de - do
BTW, who do suppose fathered Harry?
He doesn't look like anybody body on either side of the family.
Edi and the catty English bitch she shared commentary with teamed up for totally tasteless and insulting commentary.
Especially objectionable since Edi herself has been down the aisle several times (the last time in a family way?).
You know, that has always fascinated me--he does look a lot like that Hewitt guy Diana was with. But her brother does have the red hair, too. I thought I read somewhere that somehow the myth of his parentage had been debunked. I wish I could remember.
Reading about the Royals is a guilty pleasure of mine!
We just can't seem to stop ourselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.