Diana's in her own words. Children 4

Well, well, having looked back at this thread and seen that it has descended into the kind of flinging around of opinions and prejudice that dogs a site that could be so much better, I idly looked at another thread about our 'divided' society and lo and behold I see that someone here insisting that William and Harry are irritating and lazy and don't do enough work earns her income from rentals, (she's currently arguing on that thread that she gets money from her rentals but doesn't own them???) she admits she has 11 and is thinking of buying more. Wow, the hypocrisy is stunning. Maybe we all need to put our own houses in order before criticising those we hate for reasons more to do with our own psychology than fact.

Then all of us who care and talk about climate change are equally hypocritical! because each and everyone of us contributes, most of us, big time , towards it!

My carbon footprint will be minuscule compared with prince Charles and the rest of the royals for that matter . It is his hypocrisy I object to.

I was talking about the population at large gillybob, not you individually! Even so I imagine you shop, have goods, even letters delivered, use gas/electricity and leave a carbon footprint however hard you try not to!

I don't make it my business to talk about climate change and the environment though niggly I very rarely ( almost never) travel by air and my car is small and I do around 4000 ( necessary ) miles per year in it . Hardly a comparison .

William and Harry are soooo irritating, lazy and relying on the fact they can talk about their mother to get the aaaahs from the public.

Surely not merlot, didn't he take his bicycle ?

Whispers......Is this a good time to mention Jeremy Corbyn's entry into Glastonbury in a convoy of 4x4s?

To make it clear - the offices of the Head of State would not be allowed to fall into such disrepair in other countries.
A stitch in time saves nine - which seems to have been forgotten.
Lack of planned maintenance over the years costs much more in the long-term.

I think the band of hangers on is ever-shrinking not increasing as can be found out quite easily.

The increased amount of cash is to preserve a house which has been allowed to fall into disrepair and, as the 'office' of the Head of State used for greeting other Heads of State, would never be allowed in other countries.

Demanding an end to the monarchy is fair enough as people are entitled to their view, but the implications and ramifications of replacing the monarchy with a presidency would have repercussions around the world too as the Queen is Head of State of other countrues too and Head of the ever-increasing Commonwealth.

I don't think for one moment that a President of all that would cost less than the present system.

FGS, we all, including Caroline Lucas drive cars, (a lot of them 4x4's), travel by air, bus, taxi trains, eat food delivered by air and lorries, receive deliveries by mostly diesel vehicles!, sometimes travelling miles. Most of us profess to care about climate change, so I would think Prince Charles is no more hypocritical than the rest of us probably far less so!

Charles wore cuffkinks given by camilla - truth, Diana said

Charles was having an affair right through his marriage , truth, Diana said so.

Charles wanted a mistress like previous PofW, truth, Diana Said so.

Never a witness to the allegations, but Charles lied and Diana told the truth.

I agree with Ngglynellie

charles bleats on about global warming I wonder how many gas guzzling 4x4's he owns or gets ferried around in? In fact I wonder how many cars are in the royal fleet ? Hypocrites all of them .

They do when they drive themselves, as demonstrated by Prince William after the birth of his children.
I agree, she most likely wouldn't have survived that crash with or without a seat belt, but had they stayed put knowing that the media were baying at the door, and not been driving like the bats out of hell with a drunk driver at the wheel, through an underpass quite unnecessarily, she wouldn't been in that situation any way! Why they chose to try and out run that particular gauntlet, only they know! To the rest of us it seems an insane thing to do!

When do you ever see the Royal family wearing seat belts? They are chauffeured round and seat belts are too restrictive when you are waving to an adoring public. The crash was so horrific and the car so mangled she probably might not have survived anyway.

Annebach "Diana wouldn't lie"...Hmm! We have no hard evidence for that either way really!!!

William and Harry would never have to manage on a 'wage' !
Their mother left them a substantial amount of money making them extremely wealthy young men in their own right. The state does not support other members of the royal family other than the Queen and Prince Phillip, the P of W and his family are supported by the Duchy of Cornwall and not the state. As previously mentioned Prince Charles has done a lot of extremely good work with the Princes Trust, climate change and tremendous amount of other work. I believe that he is a good man, anxious and troubled maybe, but certainly not the wicked person some have portrayed him to be. Which one of us have lead blameless lives?!! He'll make a thoughtful, good king. I don't think William will be even remotely interested in modernising the royal family or being king, he certainly shows no sign of it!

Well it's hardly work is it? And boy does it pay well.

Its no more than the queen does. Its a representative role. I wouldn't want it.

Slight change of subject but staying in the royals. Now that William is no longer a helicopter pilot (and they do try to pretend they are a normal family ha ha ha) I wonder how much may hours of eating, drinking, cutting ribbons and shaking hands royal duties he will perform in an average week? 37-40 I would hope so at least. Same goes for his good time boy brother. Don't even get me started on Andrews two. What are they actually for? Apart from holidaying that is.

No need for the Royal Family. They are costing the tax payers a fortune! It's all ridiculous!

Just two things: first, Charles didn't say 'whatever love means' - he said 'whatever in love means', and I think he was trying to point the difference between 'loving' and 'being in love', which is valid. I think he's been misrepresented here. Also, why is Diana's mother never mentioned? She was around at the time, wasn't she?

Diana was a very needy woman, no doubt for various reasons. I always felt that, up to a point, she knew what being married to Charles might be like, and maybe had a naive, romantic idea that she could change things. I think that the approval and adulation that she received for the 'good deeds' she did like visiting people in private, (not a very 'Royal' thing to do) and the mines and AIDS charity work, fed that neediness. That's not to say that she wasn't a kind or genuine person. I didn't like the fluttering eyelashes and coy looks that she often gave to the cameras though.

lot of Lazy entitled eegits,if it was anyone else holding out their hands for ever increasing amounts of cash we 'd be down on them like a ton of bricks..so why is it OK for queenie and her ever growing band of hangers on? This monarchy has to end when Lizzie dies.I have no major problem with her ,she did what she thought was right with her life and it WAS very different just after the war...but honestly HOW can anyone still believe a monarchy can be justified.How many young people could afford Williams lifestyle on a part time wage ? How many people could be fitted into even ONE of his homes ..and they probably wouldn't get a full refurb every time they decide to move.Its ridiculous ! As for all their recent wailing about their mental health issues ,its all about PR ..anything to keep them in the limelight..just like the sainted Diana ..all tarred with the same brush .They WANT thepress when it suits them and then bad mouth them when it doesn't. Make them do a real job ans see how long they'd last!!