hauxwell Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 I think there is a lot of truth in what you're saying. I think the establishment is emotionally very cold. Diana was brought in as a brood mare, and whatever her faults, I got the impression that she was quite a sensitive, needy person - and someone, when she was very young was quite easy to manipulate. In some ways I find it easier to respect the Queen, than I like her. Yes I respect the queen but then I am a royalist, I would hate this country to become a Republic United Kingdom with a president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marx Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 Yes I respect the queen but then I am a royalist, I would hate this country to become a Republic United Kingdom with a president. You prefer the murky Establishment to pull your strings (and Charles') and decide what truths you should believe instead then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hauxwell Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 You prefer the murky Establishment to pull your strings (and Charles') and decide what truths you should believe instead then? Yes I would hate the country to become The Republic of the United Kingdom, with a president, prime minister or whatever. I think there would be more corruption, come on these people are politicians, but if becoming a republic pulls Your strings as you put it you are intitled to your own opinion. Let us hope the country is not ruled by a dictator. I would hate the Sheffield forum to be banned along with freedom of speech. That definitely would not pull any strings for me, in fact they would be in a big knot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 I think Charles was a victim, I don't believe that he loved Diana but he was told to marry her by the establishment. There was limitations finding a woman who did not have a past, as was expected at that time, also I do not think he would have been allowed to marry someone without a title. Who would have thought that in such a short time William would have been allowed to marry a so called commener, I am not sure if Kate was a virgin when he married her, but even if she wasn't I still think he would have been allowed to marry her. Charles did make sure his sons had a different upbringing to his and I do not think he has done a bad job. Diana is not my favourite person but she also kept her sons feet firmly on the ground when she was alive, I do believe for all of her faults she was a good mother. However I do believe she wanted to destroy the monarchy, but this of course is only my opinion. I think the reason things are different with Kate and William is because of Diana. The Establishment know they got it wrong with Diana and are terrified of getting it wrong again so William has been allowed to do things much more his own way. So much so, that I sometimes wonder if he's got something on them.... Does he know where the bodies are buried...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomjames Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 I think the reason things are different with Kate and William is because of Diana. The Establishment know they got it wrong with Diana and are terrified of getting it wrong again so William has been allowed to do things much more his own way. So much so, that I sometimes wonder if he's got something on them.... Does he know where the bodies are buried...? Diana isn't dead. It's a conspiracy. Sure of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hauxwell Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 I think the reason things are different with Kate and William is because of Diana. The Establishment know they got it wrong with Diana and are terrified of getting it wrong again so William has been allowed to do things much more his own way. So much so, that I sometimes wonder if he's got something on them.... Does he know where the bodies are buried...?[/QUOT Anna I am not quite sure what you are trying to say, do you mean that Diana's death was not an accident and William and Harry know more than we do? If this is the case, there will always be people who will say that she was murdered. It will be a bit like Richard III, did he kill the princes in the tower or was it someone else, and I think history will say the same about Diana, was she murdered? I believe Diana's death was a tragic accident, but some of my friends disagree with me. Yes I think you are right about the Royal family having to change after Diana's death, they new their popularity was slipping away. Oh and for the record I think Richard III did murder the young Princes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Diana isn't dead. It's a conspiracy. Sure of it Well, if you read the books, Diana certainly thought she had something on them, and a lot more than that footman that was raped inside the palace. Then there was the Queen's much quoted comment to Paul Burrell, that 'Dark forces were at work...' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now