Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Joe 6-pack

Historically, things rarely turn out well for members of royal families that dabble in “anti-establishment activity”.


Then how do you explain Prince Charles? Surely his “dabbling” with Camilla before, after, and during his marriage to Diana is “Anti-establishment” to say nothing of his enviro-wacko pontifications,


11 posted on 03/11/2010 1:35:30 PM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: afraidfortherepublic
"Then how do you explain Prince Charles? Surely his “dabbling” with Camilla before, after, and during his marriage to Diana is “Anti-establishment” to say nothing of his enviro-wacko pontifications..."

It's 2010. Sexual license and greenism are the establishment.

18 posted on 03/11/2010 1:47:09 PM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Most of the Brits I know think Charles is looney. but they love the Queen and detest Prince Philip.


24 posted on 03/11/2010 1:51:33 PM PST by kalee (The offences we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: afraidfortherepublic

He get a “pass” because of his obvious inbreeding breeding.


30 posted on 03/11/2010 1:56:22 PM PST by GoldenPup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Charles didn’t go on Panorama and suggest that the entire succession be centered on her son because Charles didn’t make her happy or fulfilled. And Charles didn’t call into question the lineal legitimacy of her second son in front of the entire world. All because Diana, despite her NUMEROUS blessings, didn’t feel fulfilled.

If I had a daughter-in-law that did that, I’d be beyond ticked. Charles didn’t pick that fight, everything he did was in response to what Diana did. Charles is an eccentric, not a bulimic drama addicted nutjob who made it her personal mission to destroy the life of her husband, his family, and her second son. How many numerous articles are there that Harry looks just like Hewitt?

She brought a lot of her misery onto herself. She marketed herself as a sexpot and then proceeded to wonder why men might not want to commit after bonking her. Stalking a married man and tormenting his wife with threats and screaming and making it so bad that the husband had to call Scotland Yard because he thought it might be terrorism.

Then cavorting with Dodi on his yacht and not caring about what her sons might see and read about. Not caring about her reputation to make their lives a little bit easier. I can’t imagine how William must have felt, seeing his mother on television going on a paranoid psychotic rampage against his own family that loved him, no matter the problems of his mother. Telling him about Camilla, but omitting her own adultery.

It’s a known fact that she discussed her relationships with her barely adolescent son who likely couldn’t understand half of the stuff she shoved on his shoulders and into his mind. She went over the divorce terms with him. I find it completely unforgivable. No mother who loves her children does that sort of thing.


33 posted on 03/11/2010 2:00:26 PM PST by Niuhuru (The Internet is the digital AIDS; adapting and successfully destroying the MSM host.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Oh please, Royalty and mistress’ are as old as royalty itself.


105 posted on 03/14/2010 7:55:02 AM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson