Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Countdown to Coronation of Charles III

Music has been announced. Andrew Lloyd Webber has written the anthem.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 601April 13, 2023 5:37 PM

Music will feature a wide range; including gospel and Greek Orthodox...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1February 19, 2023 6:50 PM

A new, coronation version of “CATS!” since things are so catty with the BRF?

by Anonymousreply 2February 19, 2023 6:52 PM

Sir Elton John must be pissed!

by Anonymousreply 3February 19, 2023 6:52 PM

No one cares.

by Anonymousreply 4February 19, 2023 6:52 PM

Sir Elton chose wrongly when befriending members of the BRF, then. He chose the ones who dislike Charles and Camilla.

by Anonymousreply 5February 19, 2023 6:54 PM

Applications are now open for closing of streets to enable coronation day street parties.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 6February 20, 2023 11:06 PM

Queen Camilla is swapping out the Kohinoor diamond for something else in her coronation crown.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 7February 20, 2023 11:08 PM

CPB's grandchildren will have a prominent role in coronation.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 8February 26, 2023 3:36 PM

If the Sussexes had any sense, they'd eagerly accept an invitation, be on their best behavior, stoically be unresponsive to any boos or catcalls, take whatever treatment the family wants to dish out, or, withhold from them, and fly back home.

From a pure PR standpoint, that's a win-win for both sides.

by Anonymousreply 9February 26, 2023 3:47 PM

Adel, Ed Sheeran and Shania Twain turned Charles down, but don't despair, Kate will give a two hour rendition of Chopsticks

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 10February 26, 2023 3:47 PM

Music and musicians - Coronation of Elizabeth II

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 11February 26, 2023 8:59 PM

[quote] Countdown to Coronation of Charles III

I'll check back in on about part seventeen of this incredibly boring thread on this unbelievably dull topic.

by Anonymousreply 12February 26, 2023 9:02 PM

When even Shania Twain says no ...

by Anonymousreply 13February 26, 2023 9:04 PM

Camilla’s commoner grandchildren will play a big part in the coronation, but the royal quadroon Prince Archie isn’t invited?

That is racist.

by Anonymousreply 14February 26, 2023 9:09 PM

Will Abbey seats be assigned according to complexion?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 15February 26, 2023 9:14 PM

At last, at least one music artist has said "yes".

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 16March 7, 2023 8:26 AM

Is Lulu available?

by Anonymousreply 17March 7, 2023 8:45 AM

I DEMAND that all music at the coronation be of African origin.

by Anonymousreply 18March 7, 2023 8:58 AM

Yeah, Charles....nobody cares.

Its funny how with the death of HRM all of this seems so silly and outdated. Bowing for Camilla? And Charles? Really??

They should have just given it to Will.

by Anonymousreply 19March 7, 2023 9:00 AM

Andrew probably just refashioned the theme from Love Never Dies. Watch.

by Anonymousreply 20March 7, 2023 9:01 AM

Despite invites being cut right back, at least one power-gay peer has a prominent in the ceremony, and will be there in freshly steamed ermine. No, not Mandy!

by Anonymousreply 21March 7, 2023 9:05 AM

Charlie bit me!

by Anonymousreply 22March 7, 2023 9:06 AM

[quote] Applications are now open for closing of streets to enable coronation day street parties.

Street parties? You mean like the Folsom Street ones that Great-Uncle Edward has told me about???

by Anonymousreply 23March 7, 2023 9:07 AM

Old white men in OP’s photo.

by Anonymousreply 24March 7, 2023 9:10 AM

I dreamt I was at the Coronation last night. Somehow Charles has adopted me and I sat right beside Camilla, and then Charles was asking my opinion of stuff. I wonder how many people are dreaming about the coronation amd Charles as their father?

by Anonymousreply 25March 7, 2023 1:57 PM

Camilla is to be outfitted with a new collar and leash.

by Anonymousreply 26March 7, 2023 2:23 PM

Queen Camilla will be crowned with Queen Mary's crown.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 27March 14, 2023 12:37 AM

"At the moment of his coronation, the king will wear St. Edward’s Crown, a 17th-century solid gold frame set with rubies, amethysts, sapphires, garnets, topazes and tourmalines. And the queen consort will be crowned with Queen Mary’s Crown, which was recently altered to include three diamonds totaling more than 175 carats from Queen Elizabeth II’s personal collection."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 28March 14, 2023 12:38 AM

I think Elton will be ok, r5.

by Anonymousreply 29March 14, 2023 12:38 AM

Attaboy Charlie.

Illegitimi non carborundum.

by Anonymousreply 30March 14, 2023 12:42 AM

Prince Albert and his consort Princess Charlene are first royals to announce their acceptance of invitation to coronation of KC3. Their children however will not accompany their Serene Highnesses to UK.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 31March 17, 2023 3:52 AM

This should be his theme:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 32March 17, 2023 3:55 AM

And ABBA will do a special one-off live performance of "Does Your Mother Know?" for Prince Andrew.

by Anonymousreply 33March 17, 2023 3:57 AM

Did Their Serene Highnesses confirm separate hotel suites, per usual?

by Anonymousreply 34March 17, 2023 4:24 AM

"Young Girl" will play in honor of Prince Andrew

by Anonymousreply 35March 17, 2023 5:43 AM

"Charles the turd, Super shart,

Just who the fuck do you think you art?"

by Anonymousreply 36March 17, 2023 6:26 AM

Prince and Princess of Monaco and family are planning a trip to USA later this year. Can't wait to see how that goes.

Princess Charlene is likely laying in a supply of drugs to get her through meeting the Kelly family in Philadelphia. Her Serene Highness likely will have someone look up exactly where the place is and explain why she must go.

by Anonymousreply 37March 17, 2023 6:38 AM

Well I guess I don’t need to be checking the mail every day for my invite.

Fuck that old homosexual boy and Andrew Webber!

by Anonymousreply 38March 17, 2023 7:11 AM

Betty Lynn and Miss Dunaway will sing ALW's newly-composed emotional duet, "Heavy is the Head."

by Anonymousreply 39March 17, 2023 7:19 AM

I don't think Elton is siding with the Montecito Moaners anymore....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 40March 17, 2023 8:44 AM

The Sussexes have been offered Princess Margaret's Kensington Apartment, fully furnished with fabulous antiques.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 41March 17, 2023 9:52 AM

What is that varmint on Elton John's head in R40?

by Anonymousreply 42March 17, 2023 10:24 AM

"All three of the Prince of Wales’s children are expected to take part in the King’s coronation procession at Westminster Abbey, The Times can reveal."

MM's head will explode in one, two, three....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 43March 18, 2023 6:28 AM

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussexes’ children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, are not currently factored into the plans, The Telegraph understands."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 44March 18, 2023 6:28 AM

I'm angry at God for not killing Charles before his mother died.

This worthless dolt's entire life's purpose was to sit around and wait for her to croak. It would have been SO friggin' hilarious if she'd outlived him.

by Anonymousreply 45March 18, 2023 6:32 AM

This is such a cheap arse affair compared to ERII's coronation. Then they closed the Abbey for the best part of a year for construction!!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 46March 20, 2023 8:55 AM

I rather thought the anthem should be Ding dong the witch is dead.

by Anonymousreply 47March 20, 2023 9:38 AM

[quote] It would have been SO friggin' hilarious if she'd outlived him.

I'm lol-ing just thinking about it!

by Anonymousreply 48March 20, 2023 9:41 AM


Westminster Abbey only has capacity for 2,200 persons (2,000 were invited to funeral of QEII). That railway and other extensive work done in 1952 was to add tiers and galleries which expanded seating capacity to 8,000. Modern safety regulations will not allow such a thing to happen again (nor really since IIRC), so no need for a railway and so on.

It also explains why guest list for coronation of KC3 isn't as extensive as it otherwise might have been. They've only got those two thousand some odd seating and that's it.

by Anonymousreply 49March 20, 2023 9:51 AM

Yes, r15. They're aiming for an ombre effect.

by Anonymousreply 50March 20, 2023 10:00 AM

charles and camilla couldn't find a singer from England to sing at the coronation?

I guess no one wants to associated with those two

by Anonymousreply 51March 20, 2023 10:01 AM

Welsh bass-baritone Bryn Terfel will be singing at KC3's coronation.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 52March 20, 2023 10:12 AM

Line up thus far:

"These include a new Coronation Anthem by Andrew Lloyd Webber, a Coronation March by Patrick Doyle, a new work for solo organ embracing musical themes from countries across the Commonwealth by Iain Farrington, along with new works by Sarah Class, Nigel Hess, Paul Mealor, Tarik O'Regan, Roxanna Panufnik, Shirley J. Thompson, Judith Weir, Roderick Williams and Debbie Wiseman. In total there will be six pieces for orchestra, five choral works and one instrumental work."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 53March 20, 2023 10:13 AM

[quote]a new work for solo organ

Pics please.

by Anonymousreply 54March 20, 2023 11:19 AM

R19 is the “HRM” troll. It’s so subtly wrong that it enrages me every time 😂

by Anonymousreply 55March 20, 2023 1:45 PM

Time for spritz... the reek here is bad .. Deranger Thread Fumigant

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 56March 20, 2023 3:32 PM

^ Lil Archie?

by Anonymousreply 57March 20, 2023 3:33 PM

R53 Crikey! Excitement is in the air!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 58March 20, 2023 3:59 PM

I like the York Girls are Nice and Should Get More Royal Duties troll.

by Anonymousreply 59March 20, 2023 4:00 PM

The derangers are the klan grannies.

by Anonymousreply 60March 20, 2023 7:50 PM

I can't imagine anyone really being remotely interested in this. An excuse to party perhaps but other than that a huge bore. It's 2023 and the brf is inconsequential.

by Anonymousreply 61March 20, 2023 7:53 PM

[quote]If the Sussexes had any sense, they'd eagerly accept

Maybe they aren't interested like millions of other people? I mean I'd rather watch TV myself.

by Anonymousreply 62March 20, 2023 7:59 PM

Thank you for those three comments masquerading as three separate comments, R60 - R62.

The block will out.

Now fuck off.

by Anonymousreply 63March 20, 2023 8:12 PM

Read it and weep Derangers (15.6%) LOL

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 64March 20, 2023 8:42 PM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 65March 20, 2023 8:44 PM

Fuck him.

by Anonymousreply 66March 20, 2023 9:49 PM

R63 a tad OT but why do you block someone if you keep reading them? Actually how DO you? I've never blocked anyone, so I'm just curious.

by Anonymousreply 67March 20, 2023 10:24 PM

R67, I didn't read them. But when I posted R63, there was a three post gap. I have blocked that vandal previously I suppose. Pretty obvious what was going on.

by Anonymousreply 68March 20, 2023 11:18 PM

R66 No longer necessary dear. I got the job.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 69March 20, 2023 11:40 PM

I thought ALW was dead.

by Anonymousreply 70March 21, 2023 3:09 AM

If the SNP succeeds in putting republicanism on their agenda platform, which is the intention of their likely new muslim leader, it will be a complete disaster not only for the Union, but for the future of the monarchy in Britain.

by Anonymousreply 71March 21, 2023 4:36 AM

If somehow it did happen - Scotland abandoned the throne - I wonder what they'd do with the Scottish properties, Balmoral, Birkhall, etc.

On one hand, there's a lot of happy memories and history attached to Scotland, over generations. On the other hand, if Scotland departs the union, does it look right for the royal family to maintain strong ties to the country? You could get a massive amount of money in selling Balmoral or any of the places. They might want even more cash on hand, if the deluge seems likely.

by Anonymousreply 72March 21, 2023 1:34 PM

I heard ALW suggested to Charlie to take center stage at the end of the ceremony, and sing:

"This time I'm staying,

I'm staying for good...

I am back where I was born to be...

With this crown, I'll be meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"

Glenn Close is coaching him on how to deliver the lines.

by Anonymousreply 73March 21, 2023 2:10 PM

R71 Is it a coincidence that Royalists derangers and Trumper deplorables tick all the same boxes?

by Anonymousreply 74March 21, 2023 4:34 PM

If the monarchy is abolished, I think life will continue.

by Anonymousreply 75March 21, 2023 5:06 PM

After finishing Harry's book "Spare", there really is no reason for the monarchy. He makes compelling cases why this should have been buried along with his Granny in September.

by Anonymousreply 76March 21, 2023 5:24 PM

They were they just don't know it yet dear.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 77March 21, 2023 6:24 PM

I cannot imagine caring about this.

by Anonymousreply 78March 21, 2023 6:27 PM

He couldn't sing it any worse than Glenn, though I suppose she'll try for the crown anyway.

Honestly, she's worse than ever now she hears the clock ticking.

by Anonymousreply 79March 21, 2023 7:13 PM

Countdown to my country cunt coronation

by Anonymousreply 80March 21, 2023 7:18 PM

Glenn turned 76 the other day (March 19). I wonder if she still believes the movie of the ALW musical is still getting made, and she will be starring as 50 year old Norma Desmond ?

Quite honestly, I wish she'd write her memoir - that's one book I would love to read. Especially the "Sunset Blvd" chapters. Would they rival Patti's ?

by Anonymousreply 81March 21, 2023 7:55 PM

If only the sun would set on this foolish notion. Old ladies.

by Anonymousreply 82March 21, 2023 8:19 PM

God that means the only performer there's gonna be Sarah fucking Brightman.

by Anonymousreply 83March 21, 2023 8:22 PM

Queen Camilla stole a gem she likes from another woman and will be wearing that to the coronation.

by Anonymousreply 84March 21, 2023 8:26 PM

What an exciting gathering of septuagenarians and other really old people....

So exciting!

by Anonymousreply 85March 21, 2023 8:54 PM

Continuity. Tradition. The nation's history.

by Anonymousreply 86March 21, 2023 9:08 PM

For you your Majesty!


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 87March 21, 2023 10:16 PM

[quote]Continuity. Tradition. The nation's history.

Wow, breathtaking...I can't possibly miss it now.

by Anonymousreply 88March 21, 2023 10:18 PM

[quote] Continuity. Tradition. The nation's history.

Sentiments like this are fine, but the funny thing is, when Americans say the same sort of things about their own country, they’re scorned as sentimental rubes.

by Anonymousreply 89March 21, 2023 10:31 PM

R88 why do you care? Amazingly, the Coronation isn’t designed to appeal to Americans. I’m sure this will come as a shock to you but your opinion is completely irrelevant.

by Anonymousreply 90March 21, 2023 10:36 PM

R90, you’re right, it’s not designed for Americans. That’s why we kicked British ass in 1776.

Everyone has an opinion. The thread doesn’t say, “don’t post your opinion unless you’re British,” does it…

by Anonymousreply 91March 21, 2023 10:46 PM

Good Lord, could we please save a fucking "countdown" for 1 May??!!

I'm still working off the carbs and alcohol I imbibed during the ten days of QEII's funerary observances.

by Anonymousreply 92March 21, 2023 10:57 PM

Why does everything associated with this have to come down to wars fought 250 years ago?

I mean to say, why not start tying it to the Wars of the Roses and the Battle of Bosworth whilst at it?

by Anonymousreply 93March 21, 2023 10:58 PM

DL misanthropes are the dullest of all.

by Anonymousreply 94March 21, 2023 11:54 PM

I was at the Battle of Bosworth. You're no Battle of Bosworth R93

by Anonymousreply 95March 22, 2023 2:45 AM

R93 for dolts like R91 if it’s not “we kicked your asses in 1776” it’s “we saved your asses in WW2”.

They have no other response.

It’s as relevant as Britain and Canada (1812 war), Vietnam (Vietnam War), Native Americans (Red Cloud’s War), China (Formosa Expedition), Laos (Laotian Civil War), Cuba (Bay of Pigs), and Lebanon (Lebanese Civil War) not being able to resist “we kicked your asses”. It’s done and mostly more recently than 1776.

by Anonymousreply 96March 22, 2023 2:49 AM

Good times.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 97March 22, 2023 2:52 AM

Hilarious that these deranged royalist lickspittles assume anyone who is not wildly enthusiastic about Charlie and his Side Piece or who doesn't want to drink the blood of the Sussexes must be filthy Americans. Same way Trumptards think we must be ANTIFA. Cultist gotta cult regardless of nationality. Mental illness knows no borders.

by Anonymousreply 98March 22, 2023 2:52 AM

You sound pretty sane yourself, doll.

by Anonymousreply 99March 22, 2023 2:53 AM

It never ceases to amaze me how Brits always have a group to blame for the dwindling interest in their archaic monarchy but the monarchy itself.

by Anonymousreply 100March 22, 2023 3:35 AM

Latest poll on the monarchy: 55% of Britons think the monarchy is good for Britain, of those 30% think it is very good, 18% want an elected Head of State, the rest are Don't Knows.

And that's with a far less popuiar monarch than the last one, with a rogue son, a rogue brother, and a marriage grudgingly accepted after 18 years.

The government knows it would need close to 80% polls against the monarchy even to contemplate a referendum. That's the reality.

The British monarchy isn't going anywhere, any time soon. Especially if Charles pops off sooner than his parents did, and the enormously popular younger couple take over with their brood of attractive children moving into their teen years and commanding space all over the magazines.

Charlotte has inherited Diana's legs, that could be seen in the Mother's Day photos. She's going to be stunning. George is going to be the next Catch of the World, Louis is going to be breaking hearts the way William did at 16.

Only a fool would predict the end of the monarchy any time soon.

by Anonymousreply 101March 22, 2023 2:35 PM

But it seems to help some of the misanthropes of DL to rant so. I suppose all that rage over the quality of Meals of Wheels has to go somewhere.

by Anonymousreply 102March 22, 2023 2:45 PM

If Scotland leaves the UK, the SNP has stated that will retain the Windsor-Glücksburg as monarch but the governments will be separate. It is sorta like Austria & Hungary pre WWI. The emperor of Austria was ALSO the King of Hungary but the were two separate countries.

If Scotland vacates the UK, I believe they will attempt to join the UK as a "single" state which will result in a hard border between Scotland and England.

by Anonymousreply 103March 22, 2023 3:21 PM

I think Scotland missed its chance when they failed to force another referendum post Brexit and things have swung back the other way at the moment unfortunately. Scotland is likely to stay part of the union for a while longer yet.

by Anonymousreply 104March 22, 2023 3:38 PM

When you listen to ALW’s anthem, as usual you’ll be able to hear clearly who he has plagiarised this time around.

by Anonymousreply 105March 22, 2023 3:41 PM

[quote] Charlotte has inherited Diana's legs, that could be seen in the Mother's Day photos. She's going to be stunning.

Prince Andrew is excited.

by Anonymousreply 106March 22, 2023 3:57 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 107March 22, 2023 3:58 PM

Ariana Grande declined an invitation to perform.

by Anonymousreply 108March 22, 2023 3:59 PM

Great picture.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 109March 22, 2023 9:19 PM

r107’s post shows just how homely Dockyard Doris is. Such poor genes.

by Anonymousreply 110March 22, 2023 11:07 PM

So many have declined to perform at this wildly exciting cornoration....

I think maybe they should just go with some recorded music at this point

by Anonymousreply 111March 22, 2023 11:14 PM

That photo of Edward at r107!

It is extraordinary he used to look handsome (see below). I can't think of anyone who aged more terribly he did without having undergone some horrible disease or physical ailment.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 112March 22, 2023 11:16 PM

Now, let's all be careful of those using walkers, oxygen tanks, and catheters...on the dance floor

by Anonymousreply 113March 22, 2023 11:30 PM

What difference does it all make; Camilla will be drunk anyway

by Anonymousreply 114March 23, 2023 2:00 AM

The Brits do can an extra bank holiday out of it so there is a tangible get for even the anti-monarchists.

by Anonymousreply 115March 23, 2023 3:52 AM

Are bank holidays paid? I imagine some employers aren't thrilled about it.

by Anonymousreply 116March 23, 2023 8:08 PM

Interestingly, today several of the broadsheets had articles up stating that Harry's book had tainted the family and that the monarchy was at its lowest level in 12 months.

But when you read the article, they refer to an IPSOS poll of 19 January.

Yesterday, YouGov published its first quarterly poll on the monarchy, which showed a rebound for the monarchy at 58%, approval for Charles above 60%, and William and Kate well at the top with 72% and 70% approval ratings from the public, respectively (link below).

I wonder why, with YouGov as the go-to standard, the TIMES and the TELEGRAPH are reporting on the older poll, but ignoring the latest poll from YouGov, which shows, especially, the Waleses, especially, and the King, in quite good position - with Meghan and Harry still loathed by the public. William and Kate are still more popular than the Sussexes even in America, according to Newsweek.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 117March 23, 2023 8:24 PM

Even NEWSWEEK is carrying the article on the royal "bounce back", whilst for some occult reason, two major broadsheets are referring back to an older poll by IPSOS.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 118March 23, 2023 8:27 PM

Thx, R117. Odd choice by the papers.

by Anonymousreply 119March 23, 2023 10:57 PM

"Are bank holidays paid? I imagine some employers aren't thrilled about it."

UK "bank holidays" are equivalent to American federal holidays things shut down by law on that level. You also have national and public holidays as well.

In both instances neither government of USA nor UK have right to tell private employers they must close on bank/federal holidays. How employees are compensated for those days off largely is up to employers, unions or other arrangements.

In decades past nearly everything was shut on a bank/federal holiday especially the big ones such as Christmas. In past few decades you've seen increasingly many places are open for business including retail and services.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 120March 23, 2023 11:19 PM

Bank holidays...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 121March 23, 2023 11:20 PM

[QUOTE]You also have national and public holidays as well.

In my nearly 59 years as U.S. born citizen, I had no idea. The things that DL teaches me!

by Anonymousreply 122March 23, 2023 11:27 PM

[quote] I can't think of anyone who aged more terribly he did without having undergone some horrible disease or physical ailment.

There has to be something wrong with his health, because there is no way that he could have aged that badly without some illness. The difference in appearance between R107 an R112 is far too significant to chalk up to normal aging.

I do give Prince Edward credit for staying out of trouble, unlike his nasty brothers.

by Anonymousreply 123March 24, 2023 3:55 AM

It has been announced by the Palace that should His Majesty Charles III pre decease The Queen. Camila will be known as Mother of the Nation.

by Anonymousreply 124March 24, 2023 7:11 PM

^ Guess again.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 125March 24, 2023 7:12 PM

If Charles goes first Camilla will disappear from public life almost entirely. I think she accepts her lot in life, but would prefer a quieter, more normal life. Just my guess based on the fact she retained her own home and goes there still to be with her own grandchildren. Could be wrong.

by Anonymousreply 126March 24, 2023 7:25 PM

R124 One would have thought : Side Piece Of The Nation

by Anonymousreply 127March 25, 2023 3:25 AM

Attention you UK bitches, I want one of these limited edition Marks and Spencer coronation biscuit tins!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 128March 25, 2023 5:38 AM

R124 Bitch stole my act.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 129March 25, 2023 5:57 AM

Wow, they really couldn’t land any major act.

by Anonymousreply 130March 25, 2023 6:11 AM

We wanted to sell photos of Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet at the door of Westminster Abbey on the day of the Coronation, but my father-in-law has refused to allow it. Harry and I know the King's refusal is racially motivated.

by Anonymousreply 131March 25, 2023 6:25 AM

Balmoral Castle and its estate, or at least part of the estate, is being given to the nation. It's an open secret that's been known for years. It's likely to be announced during coronation week, possibly on the eve. Chuckles and Camilla will retain Birkhall. The same may apply to the equally unused Sandringham. However, if that's the case, it's likely they'd retain the agricultural land.

by Anonymousreply 132March 25, 2023 7:26 AM

There's several big houses on both estates besides the principal houses, so they could also retain those e.g. Wood Farm at Sandringham, and Craigowan Lodge at Balmoral. And that's not half of it. The Sandringham estate has 27 properties! It makes sense to turn over both the big houses as they cost an absolute fortune in maintenance.

by Anonymousreply 133March 25, 2023 7:39 AM

[quote] Balmoral Castle and its estate, or at least part of the estate, is being given to the nation. It's an open secret that's been known for years

The Balmoral estate is huge, close to 50,000 acres and the Scottish government has been wanting to break up the large estates. If this were ever passed, the BRF would be required to give up over 45,000 acres. They know what's coming, so that's why they agreed several years to "generously" turn the bulk of it over to the nation. England has no such plans to reduce individual or corporate landholdings, so the royals will hold on to Sandringham.

by Anonymousreply 134March 25, 2023 7:47 AM

[quote]and the Scottish government has been wanting to break up the large estates.

That's never ever going to happen. It's not being done because of any such left wing SNP fantasy. It's being done because Charles has no intention of using the castle, prefers the cosier Birkhall, and the castle costs upwards of a million smackers a year to maintain.

by Anonymousreply 135March 25, 2023 7:52 AM

Oh just clear out why don't ya

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 136March 25, 2023 8:01 AM

Fuck Charles and Camilla. May his reign be extra short.

by Anonymousreply 137March 25, 2023 8:20 AM

I love Camilla. And wishing death on someone who has done you no intentional harm will only boomerang terrible luck back on you, r137.

Oops! No edit button for you! You're stuck with it.

by Anonymousreply 138March 25, 2023 10:16 AM

It’s always entertaining to hear Americans banging on about something about which they know so little. But about which they assume to know so much. Always. Always. Always.

You people are so stupid, which is why we laugh at you.


by Anonymousreply 139March 25, 2023 10:47 AM

And we laugh at your ridiculous teeth.


by Anonymousreply 140March 25, 2023 11:36 AM

No ‘caption this’ requirement for the pic at OP?

by Anonymousreply 141March 25, 2023 12:00 PM

R138 Welcome to DL Your Majesty.

by Anonymousreply 142March 25, 2023 3:10 PM

R139, you’re funny. Telling people not to have an opinion on a message board because they aren’t “qualified.” And believe me, we are laughing more at you for this ridiculous idea than you’re laughing at us. I mean, that’s hysterical. It’s like you never entered the internet before.

by Anonymousreply 143March 25, 2023 3:17 PM

R131 Not at all. It would cut into our profit.

by Anonymousreply 144March 25, 2023 3:28 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 145March 25, 2023 3:32 PM

Daily Deranger Thread Fumigant. This one's a tent.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 146March 25, 2023 3:34 PM

R145 Well they are still popular among the convicts.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 147March 25, 2023 3:38 PM

^ Like attracts like dear

by Anonymousreply 148March 25, 2023 3:39 PM

R145 THE TIMES! Only stupid Americans would believe that communist rag

by Anonymousreply 149March 25, 2023 3:43 PM

So, palace intrigue these days isn’t cloak and dagger, poisonings or kidnappings, it’s death by social media and tell-alls?

by Anonymousreply 150March 25, 2023 4:14 PM

^ When you're a powerless archaic circus that's all ya got.

by Anonymousreply 151March 25, 2023 4:26 PM

[quote] If Charles goes first Camilla will disappear from public life almost entirely. I think she accepts her lot in life, but would prefer a quieter, more normal life. Just my guess based on the fact she retained her own home and goes there still to be with her own grandchildren. Could be wrong.

Agreed! The key to Camilla and Charles happy longevity is that they don't spend a lot of their time together, which was an issue Diana had with Charles in the early days. Apparently Camilla is a slob who loves to hang out in her bathrobe at her private residence and hates being followed around by servants. She's he happiest with he books, horses, and grandchildren at her estate. Charles is his happiest on his own at Highgrove in his gardens. I don't think Camilla was ever desperate to be Queen, but after many years of hatred by press and public (deserved and undeserved over time), I'm sure it's a nice fuck you, but I think it's about it. Camilla is not into jewels and couture. She's into tweed, wellies and old Barbar jackets.

by Anonymousreply 152March 25, 2023 6:52 PM

Tina Brown opines that the Sussexes have won PR war. Harry and Meghan are global super stars. . The Windsors are now badly damaged provincial brand confined to the little island of England.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 153March 26, 2023 7:17 AM

^ Willy can always get a gig with Peggy in a Polish gay bar.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 154March 26, 2023 7:20 AM

Oh R153 you’re quoting from “Celebitchy”? I’m almost embarrassed for you.

by Anonymousreply 155March 26, 2023 7:31 AM

R153 England is an island? I never knew.

by Anonymousreply 156March 26, 2023 7:59 AM

Amazing how the CB and LSA trolls found their way back here, innit?

It's too bad R152 didn't see YouGov's poll of less than a week ago that discovered that the senior royals and the monarchy had "bounced back" after Harry's little hatchet job, whilse, interestingly, the Sussexes star continued to fall.

Charles hasn't had ratings of over 60% in YouGov's polls in decades. Kate and William are at 70% and 72%, respectively, the two most popular royals in the country - in fact, in America, too.

The monarchy itself is back up to 58% approval ratings.

As for a provincial royal whatever- check out Denmark, dear R152. The oldest monarchy in Europe, a tiny little provincial backwater, and its monarchy is going strong.

Then there's Spain, where the monarchy is considerably less popular than it is in Britain, and quite a few rumblings from Spain's increasingly republican population - the Spanish monarchy survived a corrupt King who had to abdicate and flee the country to keep from being prosecuted and imprisoned for his financial crimes . . . oh, and his son-in-law is also serving prison time for financial crimes . . . .

And, yet . . . there are Felipe and Letizia . . .

And there are Charles and Camilla on their way to the Abbey, with the hugely popular Waleses right behind them . . .

Be off, R152, before someone drops a house on you.

by Anonymousreply 157March 26, 2023 1:41 PM

R157, LSA/Celebitchy trolls aren’t here. Much as I love DL, it doesn’t compare to the forums on both those sites, especially LSA. I know you want to think that there are invaders on DL, but no, it’s just the garden variety BRF haters and lovers. And most of both sides weren’t here before, and they aren’t gay.

by Anonymousreply 158March 26, 2023 4:33 PM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 159March 26, 2023 5:06 PM

[quote] Camilla is not into jewels and couture.

You're flat-out wrong. Camilla loves jewelry--she is a big collector of pieces from Van Cleef and Arpels.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 160March 26, 2023 5:09 PM

The Palace announced today that Camilla The Queen Consort Mother to the Nation has been granted the additional title of:

Fabulous Chic Couture Goddess Of Great Britain,Ireland ,Scotland,Wales and All Dominions beyond the Seas and the Third Rock From The Sun

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 161March 26, 2023 5:15 PM

I can't imagine a lot of people interested in this.

by Anonymousreply 162March 26, 2023 6:36 PM

R162 The number of threads just on DL, the thousands of comments under articles about the BRF from the broadsheets to the tabloids, suggest otherwise.

It's the greatest gossip show on earth; if you could resurrect the Liz/Dick/Debbie/Eddie fiasco during the filming of "Cleopatra" it might have some competition (I was there for that, so I speak with assurance), but little else. What do you think all those courtiers, pages, ladies and gents in waiting, clerics, cooks, chambermaids, et al., talked about?

What do you think the corridors and anterooms of all those palaces were filled with all these centuries? Gregorian chants?

And, after all . . . you're here, aren't you?

by Anonymousreply 163March 26, 2023 6:43 PM

R140 is living in the 1940s. Someone point her to the teeth of Queen Margrethe of Denmark, and her sister's, as well.

Meanwhile, both Diana and Kate had perfectly nice teeth and smiles. The Queen's smile was described as "mega-watt" by everyone who saw her in person.

The Britain that everyone keeps mocking is actually either dead or on its last legs.

It's like the old "cutting ribbons" mantra, that conveniently leaves out Charles' landmark youth help organisation, the work he did in conservation before it became fashionable, Diana's patronages, Kate's focus on early childhood development, and Camilla's focus on domestic violence - the latter generated by someone close to her who was a victim of it (no, not Harry).

Then there's the "the richest family in the world" mantra, which is a joke, as the BRF isn't even the richest family in England. The current PM's wife's father, the Duke of Westminster, and JK Rowling, just for starters, could buy and sell the King 20 times over. He's a pauper by the standards of the really rich.

The BRF wear jewels that for the most part were colleted decades, if not centuries ago, by long-dead ancestors. The Greville Bequest to the Queen Mother in the 1930s now forms a great deal of the personal collection. The castles were purchased and built years ago, all the descendants have done is renovate every 20 years. The art collection was build on the foundation of stuff collected beginning in the 1920s.

The Duchy of Cornwall acquired Highgrove; it's owned by a Trust now. It gets visitors every year, after Charles' team did a fantastic job of turning it into a jewel of a house; Charles' work there brought back species of flora and fauna that development and climate change had chased out.

Except for the horses, cars, and continued expansion of the art collection, the current BRF is really living off stuff acquired way earlier, that they didn't have to buy: only maintain and renovate.

They live richer than they are. They're hardly poor, but compared to the corporate CEOs, people like Musk and Zuckerberg, the Duke of Westminster, the faceless industrialists . . . the BRF are merely well off.

And I'd like a recent photo of Camilla, Charles, William, or Kate cutting a ribbon at a new Tesco.

by Anonymousreply 164March 26, 2023 6:58 PM

Thank you for your patience, R164. Excellent points, all true, argued with maturity. I could have managed the content but not the fortitude.

by Anonymousreply 165March 26, 2023 7:04 PM

One or two comments does not equal being interested and gossip rags make up shit to sell to gullible suckers and the "comments" are old hags who live vicariously through others like you Klan Grannies. In short, you are overestimate interest in this.

Bye now, Granny.

by Anonymousreply 166March 26, 2023 7:11 PM

R157, I think you mean R153. I would never espouse LSA, Celebitchy or LSA ideology. Just wanted to clarify that as to never be aligned with the aforementioned.. My post was about Camilla being a slob who probably would rather not be Queen and enjoys her own place.

by Anonymousreply 167March 26, 2023 7:17 PM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 168March 26, 2023 7:19 PM

The Royal Reporter Jobson was on a breakfast show cackling that Charles should dangle his grandson Archie over the balcony. It's had a huge backlash both online and behind the scenes.. Jobson has disappeared from sight. Jobson is Charles and Camillas go to Reporter. Today allegedly the uk tabloids were told to drop as many anti Sussex articles and Andrew articles as possible. If you go to the UK tabloids online take a look. They are going to specifically target Meghan and any of her friends. My source is impeccable.

by Anonymousreply 169March 26, 2023 7:38 PM


by Anonymousreply 170March 26, 2023 7:41 PM

R169 Jobson a ROTA sycophant wrote the authorized biography of his mate Charlie. Here is this fat pig socializing with the man whose infant grandson he wants to assault. And Grandpa says not a word. How can anyone with any morality bow down to this filth?. You are who you grovel to. Royalists are servile arse kissing scum.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 171March 26, 2023 8:43 PM

Just keeps getting better and better for "our betters" hey Hyacinth?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 172March 26, 2023 8:44 PM

^Mountbatten was a know pedo. Charles called him "my precious mentor and inspiration"

by Anonymousreply 173March 26, 2023 8:46 PM

Harry and Meghan should not let these freaky pedos any where near their children. Stay home where it's safe.

by Anonymousreply 174March 26, 2023 8:47 PM

Foreplay in the British Royal Family

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 175March 26, 2023 8:49 PM

King Pedo and another one of his "mentors"

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 176March 26, 2023 9:24 PM

Sir James Wilson Vincent Savile OBE KCSG (Order of the British Empire) Knight Commander of St. George. Guess Sir Jimmy got those illustrious titles from Her Majesty for what? OBE was for raping hundreds of children? but the KCSG was for the necrophillia? Royal grannies please clarify. Thanks ever so.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 177March 26, 2023 9:34 PM

Now I ask you Hyacinth ,does this look like the face of a depraved pedophile?

Take your time dear.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 178March 26, 2023 10:16 PM

“Hyacinth” and “deranger” aren’t really taking off for you, are they, R178?

by Anonymousreply 179March 26, 2023 10:38 PM

Tina Brown is right and wrong. I don’t think Meghan and Harry are popular in the US, more infamous. BRF has been boring for years that is why they have fallen in global popularity. H&M shook some things up, the haters write more about them than anything else. So them going would be interesting to those following the saga because nothing else will be, but overall, people not caring has nothing to do with M&H. Americans by in large have never really cared. The Royals want global status. The royalist posters here are delusional with the bullshit that they are heads of state and not meant to be popular. Of course they need and want to be popular because controlling all the assets/money is dependent on the British people keeping them in their roles and who doesn’t want worldwide reverence? Why did Charles resent Diana? She eclipsed his popularity.

by Anonymousreply 180March 26, 2023 10:51 PM

[quote] The Royals want global status.

That just ridiculous. Their role is to serve the nation. They are wealthy either way. This is not celebrity.

by Anonymousreply 181March 26, 2023 10:56 PM

Not that it will ever happen, but R180 would do well to pick up a history book.

by Anonymousreply 182March 26, 2023 11:02 PM

Well, r181… that’s what they tell you. The minute people don’t buy it, they’re done.

by Anonymousreply 183March 26, 2023 11:13 PM

Yes, they had those ridiculous EarthShot awards ceremony in the US with celebrity performances and guests, but not the actual recipients present, because they don’t want want global recognition. These posters don’t help their cause with the stupidity they spew. Make it make sense at least.

by Anonymousreply 184March 26, 2023 11:28 PM

What does that mean, R183? If people are telling you things, get to emerg.

by Anonymousreply 185March 26, 2023 11:39 PM

The Earth Shot winners were announced in real time. Bringing them all over would have been very costly. Bringing the winner over would have been kind of a giveaway.

by Anonymousreply 186March 26, 2023 11:40 PM

They want recognition for the Prize, R184, not themselves. Recognition of themselves is table stakes. They are leveraging the fame you've decided they achieve for themselves to put the focus on solutions that will repair the planet. They're not Meghan Markle.

by Anonymousreply 187March 26, 2023 11:42 PM

R185…ummm… that’s what they tell you. No one is telling me anything.

by Anonymousreply 188March 26, 2023 11:48 PM

Oh, OK, R188. Definitely. 100%.

by Anonymousreply 189March 27, 2023 12:29 AM

👍 r189.

by Anonymousreply 190March 27, 2023 12:43 AM

Queen Mum said the BRF had to remain a "mystery". That was what the "magic of royalty" was all about. When Phillip did the ill received documentary in 60's showing the family at BBQ's and making vapid conversation over curry the old gal was appalled. Never let "them " behind the curtain. Well Diana yanked back the curtain and now Harry has ripped it off the hangings and thrown it in the rubbish. Revealing there is no "royal mystique" just a rich vile family of very unattractive people. But you lickspittles continue to pay no attention to the man behind that shredded curtain.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 191March 27, 2023 2:41 AM

Will the South Parkles be contributing to the entertainment? Perhaps Harold could do his juggling act and his harridan can do mocking and exaggerated curtsies for the crowd?

by Anonymousreply 192March 27, 2023 1:03 PM

^ Google: Harridan

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 193March 28, 2023 12:48 AM

[quote] Sir James Wilson Vincent Savile OBE KCSG (Order of the British Empire) Knight Commander of St. George. Guess Sir Jimmy got those illustrious titles from Her Majesty for what? OBE was for raping hundreds of children? but the KCSG was for the necrophillia? Royal grannies please clarify. Thanks ever so.

The Order of the British Empire is given on the orders of the Government. The monarch (or representative) may present it to the recipient, but they have no say in who receives it. Only certain honours and orders are awarded solely at the monarch's discretion.

The Knight Commander of St. George is not a British Order, but a Papal one. You'll have to take that up with the Vatican.

by Anonymousreply 194March 28, 2023 1:21 AM

It is interesting how few people are aware of how much of a role the government actually, if quietly, plays in what the Palace can and cannot do. The fact is, whether the Head of State is an elected or hereditary position, it is Parliament and Downing Street that call the shots.

From foreign tours, to public statements, to honours, to state banquets and invitations to foreign Heads of State, the Palace does the will of the government.

Which is why, ironically, the monarchy is still so useful to the government, which can hide behind the monarchy's glossy surface.

An elected Head of State would provide absolutely none of the cachet that the monarchy does, and this is true in places like, say, Denmark, where state banquets and the royals dripping jewels (you should see Queen Margrethe's emerald suite if you think QEII's was something to gape at), a carriage ride from the station to Amalienborg Palace . . . the photo ops, the trumpeters, it's all the same deal.

The visitors love it, expect it, and want it. The monarchy nowhere gives more value for money than smoothing relationships with foreign nations. The Cambridges' visit to Pakistan two years ago ravelled up some hurt feelings after the last royal visit there twelve years earlier. The Cambridges behaved impeccably and everyone was happy.

No one wanted to see photos of a boring elected politician in a suit shaking hands with local governors and PMs.

The government is happy to let the Palace to take the fall by not bothering to correct the impression that sometimes emerges of the Palace cocking things up with the honours system. It is also happy to tell the Palace to get on its bike, you're going to Pakistan for a week - tell Kate to get her headscarves laundered.

For the government, the monarchy is a godsend. They're in no hurry to get rid of it, and any referendum would require the certainty of an 80% result. Right now, approvals for the monarchy are close to 60%. Charles has the best favourability ratings he's had since 1997.

People really need to read beyond the tabloid headlines. The tabloids tell the story most likely to generate visceral responses and clicks, not ones likely to show that this is a slightly more nuanced landscape than imagined.

The monarchy lives in a strange limbo between the fantasy world the tabloids present, and its constrained reality. It's an unenviable position, and one that William and Kate, particularly, are managing to navigate very gracefully.

And that's the trick, and the one Harry and Meghan were incapable of mastering.

by Anonymousreply 195March 28, 2023 2:31 PM

Harry should attend the coronation, that useless little attention whore Louis needs to get a glimpse of Christmas future if he doesn't mend his ways.

by Anonymousreply 196March 28, 2023 3:16 PM

R195 Wake us when you're done.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 197March 28, 2023 9:49 PM

List of those expected to attend is firming up:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 198March 29, 2023 3:41 AM

I guess we won't have to worry about dusting off our coronets and our robes since we're not invited.

by Anonymousreply 199March 29, 2023 3:50 AM

George VI's in-laws (the Bowes-Lyons) had better seats than many of the Royal Family.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 200March 29, 2023 3:56 AM

R198 Those snubbed respond.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 201March 29, 2023 5:41 AM

Can't know the players without a score card.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 202March 29, 2023 5:45 AM

The diamonds....

by Anonymousreply 203March 29, 2023 5:46 AM

Ohhh, the Chatto brothers will be there!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 204March 29, 2023 5:53 AM

The press is so desperate for anyone half decent looking from that family. The brothers are ok, but not really drool worthy.

by Anonymousreply 205March 29, 2023 5:59 AM

Don't want to hear another word from Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury nor C of E in general about what's right and proper.

Camilla Parker-Bowles a known and common adulteress is going to stand up in church upon an altar an be anointed queen. What crust!

Gay couples may only have their unions "blessed" but no church marriage, yet CPB who is no better than she should be has everything forgotten and forgiven.

by Anonymousreply 206March 29, 2023 5:59 AM

Prince Henry, 1st Duke of Gloucester at coronation of George VI sitting with rest of peers.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 207March 29, 2023 6:04 AM

It's a great big dress up party!!! Look at the sea of coronets!!

by Anonymousreply 208March 29, 2023 6:12 AM

I think the old time ones are cool looking. Charles’ not so much.

by Anonymousreply 209March 29, 2023 6:16 AM

Will see if can nab an invite to a coronation ball.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 210March 29, 2023 6:28 AM

[quote] The press is so desperate for anyone half decent looking from that family. The brothers are ok, but not really drool worthy.

But, are they cut or uncut? Harry must have kept a tally in "Spare".

by Anonymousreply 211March 29, 2023 6:31 AM

R202/R207 You forgot this snap of the players and their peers.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 212March 29, 2023 9:50 AM

R211 The Spare is the only one packing a Pair.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 213March 29, 2023 9:55 AM

[quote]Camilla Parker-Bowles a known and common adulteress is going to stand up in church upon an altar an be anointed queen. What crust!

Mrs. Merriwether!

by Anonymousreply 214March 29, 2023 1:50 PM

Can any souvenir compete with this Wedgwood Eric Ravilious coronation mug from 1937?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 215March 29, 2023 2:57 PM

Wills, Charles, and Harry all have cut cocks. Having a cut cock is a more godly, clean, and royal penis.

by Anonymousreply 216March 30, 2023 3:50 AM

If this is the best Camilla can do I call it pretty feeble.

Even Queen Mary had more style and put herself together better.

Since Queen Camilla has dispensed with ladies in attendance and dressers we can assume more of same in future. Looks as if Camilla rolled out of bed, threw on a bit of slap and grabbed something hanging in wardrobe.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 217March 30, 2023 6:02 AM

^^Vehemently disagree!!

by Anonymousreply 218March 30, 2023 8:01 AM

Well, the Germans have lederhosen, she had that.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 219March 30, 2023 1:59 PM

Bitch stole my act possums.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 220March 30, 2023 4:43 PM

Transylvanian Royalty

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 221March 30, 2023 7:21 PM

^ Bitch stole my act.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 222March 30, 2023 7:58 PM

I like Camilla's German gala dress. It actually reminds me of Methane's stupid expensive Ralph & Russo engagement pic dress. But probably more reasonably priced. I would post a photo but don't want to stink up the thread with stupid goblin Methane.

by Anonymousreply 223March 30, 2023 8:37 PM

LOL @ Methane. Very apt.

by Anonymousreply 224March 30, 2023 8:44 PM

R223 Can you translate to the Queen's English as we don't speak Deranger.

by Anonymousreply 225March 30, 2023 8:48 PM

I kind of like Camilla. I gather she's a pretty good egg and she's a good influence on himself. But sometimes I see her in photos on the job and have brief, reflexive grrrrrrr.... reaction to her. All those years of team Diana, before we understood how much blame there was to go around. Anybody else still have to remind themselves she's not so bad?

by Anonymousreply 226March 30, 2023 9:08 PM

Actually, R223, it’s now “the King’s English”, as you’re asking a question your sentence should end with a question mark and you really need to stop trying to make “Deranger” happen. It, along with “Hyacinth” and “Klan Granny” is not going to happen.

You Megstans are, as always, stupid.

by Anonymousreply 227March 30, 2023 9:10 PM

I'm not sure they're stupid. Probably weren't in school long enough to have assessed. And the diabetes can affect alot of things.

by Anonymousreply 228March 30, 2023 9:11 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 229March 30, 2023 9:14 PM

Camilla's black and silver ballgown is too heavy, too embroidered, too shapeless to be a knock out design. The tiara is competition with all the silver embroidery. The lady in purple silk or whatever looks stunning. Simple, elegant. Camilla is carrying a lot of weight so designers are pretty limited. But that comforted heavy like drapery fabric is just not chic. I suspect it is also very uncomfortable to wear.

by Anonymousreply 230March 30, 2023 9:18 PM

Comforted heavy like drapery fabric? I don'f think so. It had body, but was not heavy. She has been ill and likely taken various meds, so I'm happy to see her on KC3 first state trip. And no, I never stanned St. Di, so no controversy for me.

by Anonymousreply 231March 30, 2023 11:01 PM

Her Majesty doesn't need expensive gowns she can a feed bag look good and often does.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 232March 31, 2023 2:26 AM

Camilla's clothes are unremarkable and that's the way Charles likes her to be. He had enough of "Look at me. Look at me." from Diana. He's never liked attention being drawn away from him.

by Anonymousreply 233March 31, 2023 3:26 AM

Camilla looks a lot better since she got glammed up for the Consort role than she never did in her life. She was always quite dowdy but apparently aces in the sack.

by Anonymousreply 234March 31, 2023 6:29 AM

Tina Brown is an out of touch moron r153 those two are global laughingstocks.

by Anonymousreply 235March 31, 2023 8:30 AM

Has no one told Camilla about foundation garments? Those tits will be down to her knees soon enough if she's not careful.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 236March 31, 2023 9:12 AM

It's incomprehensible to me how so many of the British, including the wealthy royals and aristocrats, view their refusal to avail themselves of modern beautifying techniques, eg teeth whitening, hair colouring, laser resurfacing, as some kind of virtue. And in Camilla and the late queen's case, adequate foundation undergarments.

by Anonymousreply 237March 31, 2023 9:25 AM

It’s incomprehensible to you because you have no idea of how the British upper classes operate, and why should you? You’re a shallow parochial vacuous American. Your opinion doesn’t matter to anybody but yourself.

by Anonymousreply 238March 31, 2023 11:15 AM

Yes, bedeck yourself with priceless jewels and ultra-expensive clothes, and have teeth that look like broken rocks and tits hanging down to your knees....that makes total sense.

by Anonymousreply 239March 31, 2023 11:31 AM

I noticed Queen Camilla had 'words' with President Steinmeier's wife Elke Büdenbender on the steps of entrance to their gala dinner. As the President's wife motioned with her arm around the Queen to turn to go up the steps, Camilla stayed put. I thought it was strange. If you look at video again, Camilla is telling the President's wife "You're not supposed to touch me." Anyone else notice this?

by Anonymousreply 240March 31, 2023 1:36 PM

R223 - I really like the expensive Ralph & Russo engagement picture dress. There is NOTHING wrong with that dress.

What did that dress ever do to you??? What with the hard blow or are you just a blowhard?

by Anonymousreply 241March 31, 2023 1:41 PM

R238 - Please supply a complete dissertation on how the British upper classes operate as I would love to read it.

by Anonymousreply 242March 31, 2023 1:45 PM

HM KC3, HM Queen Camilla, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Elke Buedenbender receiving guests at state dinner.

Most ladies craned their necks but did not curtsey. Few ladies did both and also kissed HM on both her cheeks as well. Thus am going to assume the ladies in question were on more of an intimate basis with Queen Camilla or otherwise had some rank that permitted them to do so.

Many of the German men are so tall!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 243March 31, 2023 1:56 PM


Queen Camilla did indeed exchange conversation on steps with Elke Buedenbender; but do not believe HM uttered any such thing ("you're not supposed to touch me").

First of all that would be incredibly rude to insult wife of a democratic head of state. Within her husband's realms Queen Camilla or another royal might get away with such a thing (though again highly doubtful it would be uttered), but elsewhere would be another matter.

For decades now British royalty including monarch have loosened things up in terms of protocol and ritual, especially when traveling abroad to other countries.

Yes, in theory one is not supposed to touch the monarch, walk several paces behind, not look at directly, bow/curtsey, etc... But this isn't the Victorian nor Edwardian period any longer.

Besides Elke Buedenbender barely touched Queen Camilla's shoulder. In fact looking at 17:26 she didn't at all. Indeed both at bottom of stairs and again at second photo op at top Elke Buedenbender seems to be taking great pains not to touch Queen Camilla.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 244March 31, 2023 2:27 PM

Notice the form; Queen Camilla has fallen into line. Just as Prince Phillip had to do HM walks several paces behind her spouse the monarch.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 245March 31, 2023 2:33 PM

R241 The dress itself was lovely. What was wrong with it, was that it screamed I'M GOING TO WEAR THE EXPENSIVE SHIT NOW SO FUCK YOU, PLEBS!

It was totally inappropriate to the occasion, and not the first such toward which Meghan would evidence obliviousness.

You can scroll through the formal engagement photos of Mary and Frederik, Haakon and Mette-Marit, Kate and William, Diana and Charles, Felipe and Letizia, Williem and Maxima, Victoria and Daniel . . . none of those women are wearing $75,000 gowns, next to a fiance in a blue suit.

It was so In Your Face, right from the outset, that you could see it from Pluto.

The photos themselves looked like perfume ads in Town & Country.

As I said, the gown itself was lovely - but it screeched Meghan's love of luxury and status, and habit of not reading the room correctly.

It looked silly next to Harry's blue suit.

And that's what was wrong with that dress.

by Anonymousreply 246March 31, 2023 2:34 PM

The £58,000 engagement photo dress was the first definite red flag for me.

by Anonymousreply 247March 31, 2023 2:39 PM

Oh sure, a sheer embrpidered cocktail gown and matching shiny veneers are just perfect for a sunny afternoon pic in the backyard.

by Anonymousreply 248March 31, 2023 3:27 PM

This didn't happen yet? Are they waiting for him to die or something?

by Anonymousreply 249March 31, 2023 3:28 PM

Camilla actually looks exactly like a grounded aristocratic wife. The hair is obviously coloured and her teeth were fixed - so far as they could be. The British aristocrats are typically very understated in their fashion and generally happier in clothes you can get muddy in. Downton is over. Look at Sarah Chatto or the Duchess of Devonshire. I won't argue Camilla could benefit from a much better bra. Those big tits are returning to earth.

by Anonymousreply 250March 31, 2023 3:30 PM

R233 Still failing to turn a sow's ear into a silk pint.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 251March 31, 2023 5:44 PM

Hey Your Majesty, your darling wife is shore ugly!!

f you want to be happy for the rest of your life

Never make a pretty woman your wife

So for my personal point of view

Get an ugly girl to marry you

A pretty woman makes her husband look small

And very often causes his downfall

As soon as he married her and then she starts

To do the things that will break his heart

But if you make an ugly woman your wife

Ah you'll be happy for the rest of your life

Don't let your friends say you have no taste

Go ahead and marry anyway

Though her face is ugly, her eyes don't match

Take it from me, she's a better catch

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 252March 31, 2023 6:36 PM

^ Camilla and Charles have the faces they've earned.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 253March 31, 2023 9:46 PM

R252 Bond Villain.

by Anonymousreply 254March 31, 2023 9:47 PM

What does Methane do with that $75000 dress now? Does she dress up to terrorize her staff and children, and then take a soothing bong hit?

by Anonymousreply 255March 31, 2023 9:50 PM

[quote] I noticed Queen Camilla had 'words' with President Steinmeier's wife Elke Büdenbender on the steps of entrance to their gala dinner. As the President's wife motioned with her arm around the Queen to turn to go up the steps, Camilla stayed put. I thought it was strange. If you look at video again, Camilla is telling the President's wife "You're not supposed to touch me." Anyone else notice this?

Well, first of all, she's NOT supposed to touch her now that Camilla is HM Queen Camilla.

But like the other poster above, I doubt Camilla would ever have said that to her. The Queen let people touch her (which only happened on exceptionally rare occasions), and she never chastised them. The Queen Mother clucked quite a lot about when Jimmy Carter kissed her unbidden, but Elizabeth II was more polite and accepting, and Camilla will have followed her example.

by Anonymousreply 256March 31, 2023 10:07 PM

All that you need to know, R242 is in R250.

It’s not my job to educate you.

by Anonymousreply 257April 1, 2023 12:48 AM

Let's hear it for the Rainbow Tour, it's been an incredible success.

We weren't quite sure, we had a few doubts; would KC3 win through?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 258April 1, 2023 8:53 AM

Persons who put their hands upon Elizabeth II

Michelle Obama.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 259April 1, 2023 11:09 AM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 260April 1, 2023 11:10 AM

Alice Frazier, Washington, D.C., during HM's walkabout tour.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 261April 1, 2023 11:12 AM

Lydia Amito.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 262April 1, 2023 11:13 AM

PM Paul Keating of Australia put his hands upon HM's person.

Thereafter Keating was dubbed "the Lizard of Oz"

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 263April 1, 2023 11:16 AM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 264April 1, 2023 11:18 AM

"I really like the expensive Ralph & Russo engagement picture dress. There is NOTHING wrong with that dress."

It was an EVENING gown worn during the DAY! I can't say I liked the dress on its own merits - I've never been a fan of sheers, or top and bottom halves that don't match, but if she'd saved it for her first formal event with Harry it'd have been a hit. So she should have chiseled an extremely expensive day dress out of Charles, for the photo shoot.

As for Camilla, she does the best she can with what she's got. She's a 75 year old woman who's got a figure that's... above average for 75. Her fashion sense is as good as it needs to be.

by Anonymousreply 265April 1, 2023 1:19 PM

R265 For the Connected to Planet Earth post.

by Anonymousreply 266April 1, 2023 1:37 PM

Re the dress Markle chose for the engagement photo, I'll bet I was not alone in seeing this as another sign that M was not interested in "being part of the team".

The slightest bit of google search for past engagement photos of members of the RF would have clued in the actress as to what to wear.

It was obvious that Markle didn't care to join and fit in.

Some of us saw the true you then and recognized you.

by Anonymousreply 267April 1, 2023 3:34 PM

R258 King Karl draws Trumpian crowds in Berlin.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 268April 1, 2023 5:10 PM

Windsors would feel more at home in Calcutta.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 269April 1, 2023 5:16 PM

Choke on your hoods grannies.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 270April 1, 2023 7:50 PM

Queen Elizabeth II was gracious and her goal was always to put people at ease in her presence. Whether she like being hugged or not, she always handled the situation was grace. It wasn't necessarily disrespectful for Michelle to hug QEII considering they had a bond, but if she had really respected her, she would have followed the proper protocol. It's like Meghan who went in to hug Kate when they first met. It's not something you do and if you are an innocent "hugger", it's more polite to be aware that not everyone is and to err on the side of caution.

by Anonymousreply 271April 1, 2023 8:09 PM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 272April 1, 2023 8:33 PM


by Anonymousreply 273April 1, 2023 8:36 PM

R271, hugging in-laws or other extended family on first meeting is extremely common in the U.S. In fact you would consider it dutiful behavior towards new in-laws upon first introduction.

If Harry didn’t prepare her, and it sounds like he never did anything to prepare her, she may have thought the custom of not touching was for in public, or among strangers. Not necessarily among family members.

Rather than Kate, who was not born into nobility, taking extreme offense, as if she was born into the royal family and has never known any other way, she could have accepted that it was an honest mistake and then made sure someone (else) coached her how to behave in the future. Someone must have had to coach Kate herself at one time.

Kate tends to put on airs as if she personally came out of the Queen’s vagina. Kate modeled lingerie at some charity on a runway before she got married. She’s not Queen Victoria like she pretends she is. She gets more pretentious by the minute.

The Queen herself did her best to appear gracious and unruffled when well-meaning but ignorant people hugged her. If she can bear it, maybe Kate can stop doing the “I am too holy for the hem of my garment to be touched by peasants” act. Her mother was a stewardess.

This photo is captioned, “Kate Middleton took part in the St Andrews University Charity Fashion Show in 2002.”

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 274April 2, 2023 1:17 AM

Gasp! A student fashion show exhibiting a BATHING SUIT. I am outraged.

by Anonymousreply 275April 2, 2023 1:26 AM

Kate acts like she thinks she was born in a designer dress, pumps and hat. So far above the common folk she is above reproach, and should look down her nose at the disgusting peasants at every opportunity.

But there was a time when she was an ordinary commoner and dressed like this. The idea she is so offended because some other person had to learn is laughable. I’m sure someone told her to stop dressing like this at some point.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 276April 2, 2023 1:35 AM

R275, she was called “Waity Katie” for a reason. She was a thirsty social climber and would have walked the streets naked to get William’s attention if that’s what it took. Fine, but have some humility. Remember where you came from.

The only people who put on airs like that aren’t actual royalty, they’re ambitious social climbers grasping for position. I’d like to see you find a picture of Princess Anne dressed like that. People who are secure don’t need to be dressed like that. It makes you wonder how she was raised.

by Anonymousreply 277April 2, 2023 1:41 AM

Meghan with the hugs and borrowing lipgloss was weird and out of line even by American standards. That said, Kate is really pretentious as hell. No way would she ever allow her kids marry anything less than an aristocrat or billionaire. She hardly speaks because she has zero personality or a common touch. I saw a clip of her with this little girl at one of her recent visits. The little girl wouldn’t let her move on. Granted the kid was annoying, Kate was smiling, but she was unnatural with the kid, which was odd to me considering she has 3 of her own. She just had that plastered smile and wanted to get the hell away ASAP. It’s a shame William didn’t marry someone with the IT factor, but he seems like an attention seeking asshole himself.

by Anonymousreply 278April 2, 2023 1:48 AM

^Thank you Megbot. Stay jelly.

by Anonymousreply 279April 2, 2023 1:52 AM

Guess my RSVP got lost in the mail mate.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 280April 2, 2023 2:18 AM

How old are you, R274?

by Anonymousreply 281April 2, 2023 2:31 AM

[quote]Kate tends to put on airs as if she personally came out of the Queen’s vagina.

You forgot the IMHO. Or, if we're being honest, IMBO or IMIO.

by Anonymousreply 282April 2, 2023 3:58 AM

[quote] The Queen let people touch her (which only happened on exceptionally rare occasions), and she never chastised them. The Queen Mother clucked quite a lot about when Jimmy Carter kissed her unbidden, but Elizabeth II was more polite and accepting, and Camilla will have followed her example.

Although it is against protocol to touch the monarch, the late Queen wasn't bothered by people touching her, but such familiarity freaked out the courtiers and of course, the royal bodyguards. Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother would have been fine with Jimmy Carter giving her a gallant kiss on the hand or even a side kiss on the cheek. But, he kissed her on the lips which offended her personally and her sense of majesty. "The last person to kiss me on the lips was my husband, the King and it should have remained as so.", she was heard to complain to anyone who would listen.

As a number of her friends have said, Camilla also doesn't mind if someone she meets breaks protocol and initiates physical contact. And like Diana, she actually enjoys when children hug her.

by Anonymousreply 283April 2, 2023 5:10 AM

Former president Jimmy Carter swears to this day he did *NOT* kiss HM Elizabeth, The Queen Mother on the lips. Rather it was a light peck on the cheek, and that's all.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 284April 2, 2023 5:17 AM

He frenched the old drunk and she loved it.

by Anonymousreply 285April 2, 2023 5:32 AM

Prince Phillip still looking rather handsome in that photo. Can see why HM would have some trouble with him.

by Anonymousreply 286April 2, 2023 5:36 AM

Meghan should have bothered to learn the culture and Michelle O should have just known better. Both are not stupid women.

by Anonymousreply 287April 2, 2023 7:11 AM

You Yanks think more of the royals than we do because you don't to pay for them.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 288April 2, 2023 7:32 AM

R267 Yes, for quite a few people, loud bells were set off by the extravagance of the dress and its stunning inappropriateness for the setting, the time of day, and her intended's attire, let alone the modest if hardly cheap day suits worn by other royal fiancees.

Diana, marrying a future King, for the photocall, wore a blue Cojana suit off the rack from Harrod's. Later, one formal photos was taken by Earl Snowdon, Charles' uncle, that showed her seated in an emerald green gown and jewels indoors. Kate, also marrying a future King, wore a blue Elie Saab dress for the official indoor photocall, and a very classy cream-coloured wool day suit (ran about 800 quid, I think) for the formal indoor photos.

Mary of Denmark, marrying a Crown prince, wore a beautiful silk day-dress for a formal photocall and interview in a room packed with reporters, and that included a balcony appearance to cheering crowds at Amalienborg Palace. Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden, future Queen: official photos in a pretty day dress. Sarah Ferugson: winter coat over a day dress in back of Buck House, and, later formal photos also in day dress.

The only other gowned engagement photos I can recall are Snowdon's of Princess Anne to Captain Mark Phillips. And she was the Queen's only daughter, the Princess Royal and wearing a tiara, and Phillips was in full uniform, and the photo was taken in the grandeur of either Windsor or Buckingham Palace. This photo, by the way, is often referred to as the most beautiful Anne ever looked.

Only Meghan Markle, former Suitcase Girl on Deal or No Deal, marrying the soon to be sixth in line and doomed to become the future irrelevant Prince Andrew, shows up in a $75.000 evening gown in the middle of the day with a husband in a nondescript blue suit.

Only the blind couldn't read the message.

by Anonymousreply 289April 2, 2023 2:46 PM

Palace approved Royal Coronation Breakfest Sausages will be served.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 290April 2, 2023 6:28 PM

R289 Obviously you are Dee.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 291April 2, 2023 6:33 PM

[quote] Windsors would feel more at home in Calcutta.

Who wouldn't? It's such a fun song. I remember Richard Nixon and I dancing to it at the RNC.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 292April 2, 2023 9:25 PM

Here's Charles and Diana's wedding photo. Suit appropriate for the outdoor day setting.

And Charles is keeping a distance between them, and Diana doesn't want him touching her. Who among our eldergays remembers alarms going off when they saw this one?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 293April 2, 2023 11:38 PM

Jill Biden will be attending the Coronation.

by Anonymousreply 294April 3, 2023 2:16 AM

Latest bit of cheapening; peers have been told to "dress down".

"Members of the House of Lords traditionally wear a special coronation robe for the occasion made of scarlet velvet with a collar of white fur, and a coronet that determines their rank in the British peerage.

But those invited to the Coronation on May 6 have been told they may only wear their usual parliamentary ermine, used at the state opening of Parliament each year, or standard business dress."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 295April 3, 2023 6:15 AM

Yes, Mrs. Biden will be leading American delegation to coronation of KC3. Some in Britain are pretty cheesed off, more so since Biden will be going to Northern Ireland in about a week but there are no plans for president and monarch to meet.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 296April 3, 2023 6:20 AM

One wonders how many of hereditary peers (and their wives) if invited will bother attending this stripped down coronation.

On the one hand it certainly won't be the dazzling affair of old, but snubbing one's monarch may not be forgotten.

Besides since Prince of Wales in largely putting this show together it gives a hint as to what his own coronation may be like in future. Thus those hoping for a return by then of a more traditional glam and glitz coronation may be sorely disappointed.

by Anonymousreply 297April 3, 2023 6:24 AM

R297 Posting from the glam & glitz of 1953

by Anonymousreply 298April 3, 2023 6:27 AM

Derangers please post a picture of President Eisenhower at the last old rat bags circus in 1953.

We'll wait

by Anonymousreply 299April 3, 2023 6:33 AM

Still waiting

by Anonymousreply 300April 3, 2023 6:34 AM


by Anonymousreply 301April 3, 2023 6:34 AM

Gotta roast in the oven dear

by Anonymousreply 302April 3, 2023 6:34 AM

Don't look to me, am on my third Dubonnet and gin and can't be bothered.

by Anonymousreply 303April 3, 2023 6:36 AM

^Don't for get the sausages doll.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 304April 3, 2023 6:49 AM

[quote] It’s not my job to educate you.

If you can't put your money where your mouth is, then shut the fuck up.

by Anonymousreply 305April 3, 2023 6:56 AM

[quote] Former president Jimmy Carter swears to this day he did *NOT* kiss HM Elizabeth, The Queen Mother on the lips. Rather it was a light peck on the cheek, and that's all.

That's what he says. I seem to recall The Tongue quite vividly...

by Anonymousreply 306April 3, 2023 6:58 AM

Very clever response, especially for an American, R305 - I know that you people have trouble with reading, writing and finding out things for yourselves.

Have a lovely day!

by Anonymousreply 307April 3, 2023 7:25 AM

R277 is describing Meghan.

by Anonymousreply 308April 3, 2023 10:02 AM

That's not correct r270. It was dismissed over points about that book Scoble wrote and Sam is re-filing. Try again dear.

by Anonymousreply 309April 3, 2023 10:11 AM

Wait until the coronation pomp and ceremony. Nobody does pageantry like the Brits, with the gold carriage, the black horses with riders in red and silver, the flags, the music, the red brick royal road, the historic balcony of Buckingham Palace, the stunning architecture of Westminster Abbey, the purple velvet and ermine robe, the Crown Jewels, the gold orb and scepter, the throne of Edward I, the surrounding tombs of Elizabeth I and Mary I and of Chaucer and Dickens, the cheering crowds lining the entire route---No, once reminded again of their link to an ancient history as shown in today's technicolor, the British will feel that the death of E II was hers alone and not the monarchy's.

by Anonymousreply 310April 3, 2023 10:53 AM

[quote]One wonders how many of hereditary peers (and their wives) if invited will bother attending this stripped down coronation.

All of them. 8,000 people were invited to the last one. 2,000 people are invited to this one.

by Anonymousreply 311April 3, 2023 1:23 PM

I hope R310 is right. I would call myself a monarchist, not out of sentiment but out of tradition. Increasingly I look at what William and Charles are doing and I'm wondering if it's all too much change, too much slimming. We'll see. It's all going very low key. Maybe that's the way. Here's how the Dutch do it... sworn in, not crowned. Charles and Camilla were there.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 312April 3, 2023 1:27 PM

R310 LOL and it doesn't cost 100 Million GBP

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 313April 3, 2023 2:10 PM

Noone, in Britain or anywhere else, is "cheesed" that Biden is not attending the coronation, or believes that perpetual villain William is "largely putting this show together"....except for a few scraggly uninformed megbots who do nothing but complain.

I suggest that those who will be disappointed by the reduction of "glitz and glamor" of an event that last happened SEVENTY YEARS AGO maybe could re-watch QE2 ceremony and grouse about the good old days instead.

by Anonymousreply 314April 3, 2023 3:53 PM

I agree the Biden story is a total media concoction. Eisenhower didn't come. It's not the norm. There's nothing to this. In fact, it's courteous. The presence of the US president is enormously complex and disruptive from a security perspective.

by Anonymousreply 315April 3, 2023 4:10 PM

Alas, r314, Elizabeth's coronation was recorded in B&W.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 316April 3, 2023 5:15 PM

^Thanks, I was wondering about that when I wrote it, and thought nah, surely the coverage was in color. Times have changed!

by Anonymousreply 317April 3, 2023 5:19 PM

No American President has ever gone to a British coronation. Ever. Biden is following established protocol for the last 240 years.

British monarchs also do not go to American Presidential inaugurations. We fought a war over this, remember?

Every single thing that happens is not an opportunity to bash a Democratic President. Stop listening to the Trump/Fox/British tabloid version of reality and look it up.

About Biden being of Irish ancestry, that is extremely common with American politicians of his age and older. The Kennedys, Ronald Reagan, Tip O’Neill, the legendary Speaker of the House, and many others have been Irish American politicians. He is not avoiding the coronation because he is Irish.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 318April 3, 2023 6:16 PM

Yes, yes, yes, R318 - you fought a war over this - how many times do you feel the need to remind us?

Let it go - nobody else gives a fat flying fuck. .

by Anonymousreply 319April 3, 2023 8:27 PM

£8m Official Royal Portrait unveiled!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 320April 3, 2023 8:34 PM

Definitely captures the spirit of the occasion.

by Anonymousreply 321April 3, 2023 10:09 PM

^ Speak for yourself Megbot.

by Anonymousreply 322April 3, 2023 11:27 PM

R322 No need to save us a seat Grannie. 😂

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 323April 4, 2023 12:06 AM

Charles's nose in r288 is the future for both William and George. I don't think for Louis, though.

by Anonymousreply 324April 4, 2023 4:01 AM

Here's the colour version of QE II's coronation.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 325April 4, 2023 5:06 AM

Don't get those tiaras out of bank vaults just yet.

I swear this event gets more common and low key with each passing bit of news.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 326April 4, 2023 5:20 AM

The funniest part of South Park episodes that feature the Royal family is the narrators/reporters of the events. Watching a little of R325 shows that they nailed that part.

by Anonymousreply 327April 4, 2023 5:27 AM

I'm hoping for the Princess of Wales coronet. It will probably gave to be made especially for Kate.

by Anonymousreply 328April 4, 2023 5:33 AM

R326 because something that has happened three times in 112 years is “often-staid”.

Sky News is right on it!

by Anonymousreply 329April 4, 2023 5:57 AM

It’ll be like 6 hours of boredom with maybe 10 minutes of interesting. Even the Queen’s funeral was mostly boring except for a few parts. The only interesting Royal ceremonies are the weddings.

by Anonymousreply 330April 4, 2023 6:01 AM

If Kate wears tiaras to state fingers, she's damn well going to wear one to the Coronation.

Girlfriend likes her jewels, and the Coronation is going to be the second-mosf formal event of her life!

by Anonymousreply 331April 4, 2023 12:26 PM


OMFG what was the autocorrect thinking.

by Anonymousreply 332April 4, 2023 12:30 PM

How exciting! I think Kate with have on the Lover’s Knot unless Charles lets her premiere the Girls. She’ll probably have a single train bearer. Especially since they’re ditching robes for peers, so she wouldn’t be in a Duchess’s robes + coronet.

Of course Camilla with have a slightly larger train, but will she be in the George IV diadem during the ride to the Abbey; that’s the question. For the last couple hundred years, only women have worn it, so it makes sense. But it’s still so heavily associated with QE2. But Mary and Alexandra had to get on with it; so Camilla can do the same.

Will will probably default back to his boring Air Force uni, but he would look lovely back in his royal colonel full dress scarlet tunic.

With the central religious aspect, it seems like kings have skipped uniforms, in favor of elaborate court dress or a morning suit, so I suppose we might see this from the king + the various robes worn for each stage. It’ll be weird to see the Imperial State Crown on a man again when he departs and returns to the palace.

by Anonymousreply 333April 4, 2023 1:03 PM

"Girlfriend likes her jewels, and the Coronation is going to be the second-mosf formal event of her life!"

You don't have a clue do you?

The Princess of Wales, Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge is going have many, many *MANY* more formal tiara wearing occasions ahead.

There will be state dinners and other formal receptions both in UK and abroad. In fullness of time the Prince of Wales may open Parliament for KC3 with the Princess of Wales at his side.

In due time the Prince of Wales will inherit and then Kate Middleton cops the lot. As queen consort she will have again many more opportunities to wear tiaras and other jewels not only as while her husband lives, but as "queen mother" when her son inherits.

This of course largely depends upon what style the Princess of Wales wants to set now and in future. If HRH takes a page out of Camilla's book and in keeping with her FIL's and husband's wishes/intent to have a slimmed down more modern monarchy there might very well be less wearing of jewels.

It's pretty certain days of piling things on like Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother and even Elizabeth II likely are fading if not gone.

by Anonymousreply 334April 4, 2023 1:05 PM

There's footage and photos of QEII, the Queen Mother and Margaret wearing tiaras to movie premieres where they went down receiving line and met the films' stars. Can you imagine that happening now?

by Anonymousreply 335April 4, 2023 1:23 PM

Seems to me there's a risk here... if they don't wear the jewels, what is point of having the jewels? And if the jewels are anachronistic, what is the point of Trooping the Colour? Or the Garter Ceremony? Or Windsor Castle? Or the monarchy? It could be a slippery slope, because the truth as as consistently well dressed people in every daywear, they actually aren't terribly interesting. There is a big of magic still necessary to keep the show on the road. Charles and Camilla... nice people... not really magical.

by Anonymousreply 336April 4, 2023 1:25 PM

R334, the OP said the event would be the “second most formal” event not the only event. And that is true, the most formal being when William assumes the throne. It’s an awkward way of saying it, but the meaning is obvious. Before insulting them, make sure you read what they said.

by Anonymousreply 337April 4, 2023 1:49 PM

R331 “girlfriend likes her jewels”? I don’t think so. She has repeatedly worn the Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara when she has had access to so many others. She wanted to wear flowers in her hair on her wedding day and when told that she had to wear a tiara she chose the smallest of the options that were presented to her.

by Anonymousreply 338April 4, 2023 4:53 PM

R307 - Please see R304!

by Anonymousreply 339April 4, 2023 5:09 PM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Should be "R307 - Please see R305" ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

by Anonymousreply 340April 4, 2023 5:11 PM

Daily Deranger Fumigant

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 341April 4, 2023 5:50 PM

'Deranger' isn't taking off how you'd like, is it?

by Anonymousreply 342April 4, 2023 5:51 PM

R341 Sadly like most vermin, they have become pesticide resistant.

by Anonymousreply 343April 4, 2023 5:51 PM

R334 Wake us when you reach the 21st century grannie.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 344April 4, 2023 5:55 PM

It's not even a good insult. At least Klan Granny had a little clever attached to it. What does Deranger even mean? It's not even a word. Poor Meagain, her stans are so shit.

by Anonymousreply 345April 4, 2023 5:56 PM

Of course Camilla with have a slightly larger saddle, but will she be in the George IV diadem during the ride to the Abbey

Fixed for R333

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 346April 4, 2023 5:59 PM

R326 Looks like a prom queen snap. Waity Katie will always be the grocers daughter made good.

by Anonymousreply 347April 4, 2023 6:03 PM

“Waity Katie” wasn’t even funny or clever when it was coined twenty years ago R347, and yet that’s the best insult that you can come up with.

Markle’s stans never fail to show their stupidity.

by Anonymousreply 348April 4, 2023 6:18 PM

Kate's jewellery is actually quite modest unless she is glammed up for evening wear, or state events (like funerals). But in her normal daywear, she eschews chunky bracelets, often wears fun fashion earrings . . .

Because let's face it, with that engagement ring, simplicity is the way to go most of the time. Only at Ascot, state banquets, receptions for foreign dignitaries . . . she wears far less than she could.

If Meghan had gotten her hands on Big Blue, or Big Blue on her hands, she wouldn't have put that hand down once unless she was asleep.

by Anonymousreply 349April 4, 2023 6:24 PM

And, of course, Catherine does not wear her engagement ring all the time.

In candid shots of her out grocery shopping, for example, she is not wearing the ring.

by Anonymousreply 350April 4, 2023 7:09 PM

Catherine went to Marlborough ffs. She's in no way a "grocer's daughter".

by Anonymousreply 351April 4, 2023 7:16 PM

[quote]If Meghan had gotten her hands on Big Blue, or Big Blue on her hands, she wouldn't have put that hand down once unless she was asleep.

All the better to cradle a bump with, my dear.

by Anonymousreply 352April 4, 2023 11:22 PM

What's the difference between a tiara and a diadem? If anyone would know, you bitches would!

Please keep your responses to under 1000 words, thanks.

by Anonymousreply 353April 4, 2023 11:27 PM

^LOL. I cannot tell you in less than 15,000.

A tiara is worn by a woman and is invariably ornamental only at the front. It is worn by royalty or the nobility or Miss your local contest goes here.

A diadem is worn by royalty, of either sex, and is typically circular and more resembles a crown.

by Anonymousreply 354April 4, 2023 11:36 PM

I think as many of us as possible should go, and line the streets while wearing replicas of famous tiaras to show our appreciation of the jeweler's art, and historical expertise!

I'm wearing a replica of Eugenie's emerald Greville Tiara, $15.99 on ebay!

by Anonymousreply 355April 5, 2023 12:00 AM

R355 I'm wearing a replica of Catherine Princess of Wales jewel encrusted ....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 356April 5, 2023 1:02 AM

^Peg of my heart.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 357April 5, 2023 1:08 AM

I'd like one with some rockin sapphires, please.

by Anonymousreply 358April 5, 2023 1:09 AM

^a tiara, that is.

by Anonymousreply 359April 5, 2023 1:11 AM

I'll be there with bells and and ankle monitor on.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 360April 5, 2023 1:25 AM

I think the pegging rumor was inspired by that South Park episode about his wedding to Kate.

by Anonymousreply 361April 5, 2023 2:26 AM

Most powerful uptight control freaks like Willy are subs in bed and like to bottom.

by Anonymousreply 362April 5, 2023 2:51 AM


For you!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 363April 5, 2023 5:23 AM

It's official, invites are issued by "King Charles" and "Queen Camilla" (without consort).

What crust; she's no better than she should be, consort was too good for jumped up adulteress eh?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 364April 5, 2023 5:27 AM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 365April 5, 2023 5:29 AM

Still no official word from the Ginger Whinger and his fancy woman. This despite the Palace seeming to bend over backwards to accommodate.

Contrary to wagging tongues for example Tedious and Tiresome won't be seating in nosebleed section, but will actually be assigned quite good seats.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 366April 5, 2023 5:36 AM

If anyone wants to meet Meg and Harry, send them an invite fora "charity" event on Coronation Day! They might accept!

I'm quite sure they're scrambling for the best possible "previous engagement", and will accept any "charity" invite that will keep them off the British Isles on that day. And it's not like their social calendars are full.

by Anonymousreply 367April 5, 2023 6:28 AM

Her late revered Majesty Queen Elizabeth made it crystal clear in( bloody writing yet) that she wanted Charlie's side piece title to be The Queen Consort. Looks like now that "beloved mummy" is six feet under he's made her title officially The Queen. What say you hooded hypocritical grannies ? Your hollowed tradition only applies to non -Caucasians? Your emperor has no clothes . My sides.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 368April 5, 2023 4:16 PM

Silly American it is only because Her Grace The Scheming Drunken Old Ugly Harridan was too long to fit on the invites.

by Anonymousreply 369April 5, 2023 4:18 PM

They love the attention of the guessing game. I can't guess what they'll do. They'll love the drama of announcing last minute they're not coming... our safety, our safety! But it's hard to imagine her not getting her picture taken.

by Anonymousreply 370April 5, 2023 4:20 PM

R368 The BRF's traditions are indeed "hollowed". They are an empty hole filled with nothing.

by Anonymousreply 371April 5, 2023 4:24 PM

Natural Nobility

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 372April 5, 2023 5:15 PM

^ Bitches stole my act.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 373April 5, 2023 5:16 PM

When only 15% are enthusiastic about the coronation and - according to other polls - more than 30% want the monarchy abolished, it's hard to claim this is a national celebration. Or that we're a nation of royalists."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 374April 5, 2023 5:46 PM

Every Queen is either a consort or a regnant. Calling her The Queen doesn't change anything.

Unclench your pearls.

by Anonymousreply 375April 5, 2023 7:38 PM

So Rose Cholmondeley's son will be one of the King's pages of honour.

Does anyone really believe in good faith if William fucked that woman Charles would force Kate to watch that at the Coronation?

by Anonymousreply 376April 5, 2023 9:59 PM

R376 obviously!

by Anonymousreply 377April 5, 2023 10:14 PM

How old is the son, R376? Any chance he's... you know... Charles's biological grandson?

As to that rumor, I have no idea what the truth is. But the version of the rumor that I want to believe is that Meghan Markle made the whole affair story up, when Kate did something that annoyed her.

by Anonymousreply 378April 5, 2023 10:24 PM

Let us call her what we really long to:

Her Majesty Camilla The White Queen

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 379April 5, 2023 10:33 PM

Yes, it's Markle fan fiction.

by Anonymousreply 380April 5, 2023 10:40 PM

He's three years older than George. The affair lie was concocted after the birth of Louis.

by Anonymousreply 381April 5, 2023 10:46 PM

If it was her, that's probably among the canon of things they can't forgive. She better find her OPEC or oligarch billionaire soon because there's no going. back when California becomes no man's land. But maybe she plans to move to Indiana and accept awards there full time.

by Anonymousreply 382April 5, 2023 10:47 PM

I find the Coronation invite too busy. The design lends itself to cocktail napkins.

by Anonymousreply 383April 5, 2023 10:54 PM

Neither of Catherine's parents were grocers. He was an airline pilot, she was an airline stewardess, and they founded an internet business that made them pots of money.

They were solid middle-class sorts who did well.

If anyone was a grocer's daughter, it was Sophie, daughter of a sausage factory owner.

Re the invitation: at first, I burst out laughing. But the more I looked at it, the more I warmed to it. I think it takes balls to put that Green Man at the bottom . . . Charles, fair play to him, was on the conservation wagon long before most everyone else.

Actually, I've never seen a cocktail napkin that was that engaging.

by Anonymousreply 384April 5, 2023 11:05 PM

Since Tampon Charles Side Ho Mistress Camilla is now Queen, it makes sense as to why Rose Hanbury's son has a prominent role during the Coronation. Camilla & Charles have set a precedent for an adulteress mistress to be fully accepted into British royal family. Perhaps side piece Rosie will play the long game and wind up Queen too.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 385April 5, 2023 11:10 PM

"Have set a precedent for adulteress ugly as bloody sin mistress to be fully accepted into British royal family. "

Fixed for R385

by Anonymousreply 386April 5, 2023 11:12 PM

The entire Rose Hanbury story was cooked up by a couple of pro-Meghan pals, Nicole Swiftt and Giles Coren. The latter admitted being three sheets to the wind when he put it up and then hastily took it down.

Meghan was behind it, it was sheer spite.

How do I know this?

Because in his delusional book, Harry accused Charles and Camilla of putting it out there. Yes, we can just see the two by the fireside, chortling as they come up with a good way to smear the two people they need most onside.

You don't need any more proof than that statement by Harry to know it was Meghan.

by Anonymousreply 387April 5, 2023 11:14 PM

Charles is the first king to have stepchildren in almost 600 years.

by Anonymousreply 388April 5, 2023 11:20 PM

Rosie's nickname is Peggy

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 389April 5, 2023 11:28 PM

R388 forgot the evil stepmother.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 390April 5, 2023 11:31 PM

Oh I love the Green Man! And Camilla's boar too. Lots of the individual elements of the invite are great. I think I am warming to it too now. It's unexpected, colourful and full of symobolism.

by Anonymousreply 391April 5, 2023 11:32 PM

R385 can you post that again, but in English this time?

by Anonymousreply 392April 5, 2023 11:41 PM

Coronation Invitation

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 393April 5, 2023 11:42 PM

I like how the heraldic lions have red nail polish.

by Anonymousreply 394April 5, 2023 11:48 PM

Wrong r387. I had heard way back then that there was trouble with the Cambridges’ marriage . No details, only that they were having serious problems. I heard it from a friend who knew someone who knew someone. I took it with a grain of salt, of course, because everyone know some who knows someone, etc. I even posted it on one of the threads (geez has it been that long?) Not more than a month after I heard it, the story broke about the supposed affair.

by Anonymousreply 395April 6, 2023 12:02 AM

R395 = REO Speedwagon

by Anonymousreply 396April 6, 2023 12:09 AM

Wow. It must be true.

by Anonymousreply 397April 6, 2023 12:13 AM

Wrong, R395 - Giles Coren himself admitted to making it up and posting it after a rather long lunch.

by Anonymousreply 398April 6, 2023 12:35 AM

I love the Coronation invite design! Lovely and full of natural symbols, colorful and cheerful.

And yeah, I love the Green Man, why the hell shouldn't the King of a green and pleasant land use it.

by Anonymousreply 399April 6, 2023 1:14 AM

I can't see the garbage posts, but sounds like the MegSniffers are really and truly MAD. Oh well, better luck next life y'all.

by Anonymousreply 400April 6, 2023 1:41 AM

Well this is obviously a stupid American speaking or a Wog communist.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 401April 6, 2023 4:18 AM

R383 It looks like an invite to Louis fifth birthday party.

by Anonymousreply 402April 6, 2023 4:21 AM

Settle down Kate H&M are the least of your problems Your ex- friend and Willy's side -piece Rose Hanbury's son has been given a role in the coronation, they’re paving the way for your exit luv. Single dads get sympathy remember. Time to start checking your brakes Katie.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 403April 6, 2023 4:57 AM

Katie is really one thick bitch.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 404April 6, 2023 5:08 AM

So Rose Cholmondeley's son will be one of the King's pages of honour.

Does anyone really believe in good faith if William fucked that woman Charles would force Kate to watch that at the Coronation?

Charles fucked Camilla when Diana was in the next room. So yeah everyone believes it but thick Klan Grannies.

by Anonymousreply 405April 6, 2023 5:26 AM

I don’t believe it, I think it was a rumor put out, no comment on who. However, I think he probably cheats. He and his wife have a weird vibe. More like a partnership/arrangement than a loving marriage. Plus, all these men cheat.

by Anonymousreply 406April 6, 2023 5:31 AM

Windsors have proven time and time again that they are without any sense of morality. Elizabeth was the only one who kept her knickers on. The rest rut around like pigs at the trough.

by Anonymousreply 407April 6, 2023 5:32 AM

Not so much that Charlie and Willy cheat ( the rotten apple doesn't fall far) it's that they cheat with absolute pigs. Stormy on her worst day looks a million times better then Rosie (4) and as for Camilla (-9) .

by Anonymousreply 408April 6, 2023 5:39 AM

Meanwhile in Happily Ever After.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 409April 6, 2023 5:44 AM

R408, have you seen the women in England, particularly in their circles? Even Diana wasn’t a raving beauty.

by Anonymousreply 410April 6, 2023 5:47 AM

Honestly, I never heard the reason the Cambridges were having problems. Could have been the affair, could have been something else. But the timing was spot on, so something was going on.

by Anonymousreply 411April 6, 2023 12:29 PM

At the christening of Louis, just after the story broke, every photo of Kate showed her gazing at the baby. Sure that’s natural but even when she was walking, she was looking at him. Having heard the affair rumor, it was very easy to “see” that she was giving William the cold shoulder. There’s only a short video of them walking into the church and she doesn’t make eye contact or acknowledge William at all. That’s what made me think there was some truth to it.

Giles Coren denying the story the next day when he sobered up can be explained that he was aghast that he put it out there, we all do stupid things when drunk and that was a big expose on a popular royal.

Since then, if the story is true, they appear to have mended their marriage. They seem to have an easy going relationship, lots of familiarity when they are together. Neither one is a good enough actor to fake affection every time they meet the public. Again, this is my perception/prejudice because I can’t look at Meghan without screaming fake. Her demeanor is so artificial.

by Anonymousreply 412April 6, 2023 1:18 PM

If anyone was a grocer's daughter, it was Sophie, daughter of a sausage factory owner.

R384 - Sophie's father, Christopher Bournes Rhys-Jones (born 1931), is a retired executive sales director for an importer of industrial tires and rubber goods.

Margaret Thatcher's father was the grocer. Her father, Alfred Roberts (1892–1970), owned a tobacconist's and a grocery shop in Grantham Lincolnshire.

by Anonymousreply 413April 6, 2023 1:22 PM

R395 - This is the umpteenth time you've put that same post up on varied royal threads. You might want to change up the verbiage, at least, so you can't be spotted for the troll you are.

Anyone who uses the phrase "I heard it from a friend" about the state of a marriage that is one of the most secluded on the planet, and which, comically, appears to be stronger than ever, you give the game away.

You haven't got a "friend" that close to the Cambridges (who, by the way, are now the Waleses, you might want to update that, too), you haven't heard anything, but you're clearly a William/Kate hater determined to push this.

We see you. Get lost.

by Anonymousreply 414April 6, 2023 3:06 PM

R412 Jesus. The woman looking down adoringly at a baby who just happens, finally, out of the three to look like her and by all accounts was born cheeky, and is still nursing and flowing with hormones, doesn't look adoringly at her husband at the christening.

Ergo, they must be having troubles.

Her worst enemy wouldn't deny Kate is particularly into motherhood.

Fuck off, you moron.

And just FYI: the best marriages also function as a partnership team. In the game these two are in, it's necessary.

He could have had virtually anyone. They dated for eight years.

Passion recedes in all long partnerships, especially after women give birth and get, as nature directs they should, get absorbed in infants, because if they didn't, they'd give the little fuckers back.

Assuming TIP from that is beyond moronic. Try again.

by Anonymousreply 415April 6, 2023 3:11 PM

Maybe Charles is trolling Kate by inviting Rose’s son. He’d have to be blind, deaf and dumb to have no idea of the rumors about the boy’s mother having an affair with William. Why do this to Kate? Whom does it serve? It’s not like there aren’t other children who could be pages.

My guess is he wants to acknowledge a bastard grandson. There are rumors Rose’s husband is gay. And there’s a long history of royal mistresses marrying some rando to be the official “father” of royal bastards. Maybe Rose is William’s Camilla, and his father approves and wants to acknowledge another grandson. None of these people ever learn anything.

by Anonymousreply 416April 6, 2023 3:20 PM

[quote]Having heard the affair rumor, it was very easy to “see” that she was giving William the cold shoulder.

It's very easy to see what you want to see. The truth is, with the possible exception of tiaras, none of know what the fuck we're talking about when it comes to the private lives or personal values of these people. They could be Anglican monogamists, devoted to family and the rules of God and still thinking there's really something to that divine right of Kings stuff, or a debauched, entitled swinger married to a family first scrapbooker who likes to shop at the high end. We don't know and absolute pronouncements, especially involving those verbal signs of risible "I feel" or "I suspect" or "I see", are arrogant bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 417April 6, 2023 3:34 PM

"There are rumors Rose’s husband is gay"

David Cholmondeley, Rose's husband, is a bisexual.

He has fuckedf is way (women & men) through the worldwide Entertainment Industrial Complex in Hollywood, NYC, and various European cities.

by Anonymousreply 418April 6, 2023 3:36 PM

Interesting, Cholmondeley is no longer Lord Great Chamberlain after a couple of decades in the position. Beyond being the the man who carries the crown on the pillow, I have no idea what his duties are.

He's said to live in Paris, primarily, with his male lover.

by Anonymousreply 419April 6, 2023 3:50 PM

^I didn't mean to sign that as "H" This thread is incredibly slow and jerky on a phone.

by Anonymousreply 420April 6, 2023 3:53 PM

No, now he's a permanent Lord-in-Waiting to the new king.

"As a permanent Lord-in-Waiting, the Marquess of Cholmondeley, 62, will be invited to attend important state and royal occasions. He will also represent His Majesty at royal events. For example, one of his predecessors, Viscount Brookeborough, was called upon to welcome President and Mrs Trump to the UK on behalf of the late Queen Elizabeth II. There are two kinds of Lord-in-Waiting: political (those who have been appointed by the government) and non-political (appointments by the the monarch). The Marquess of Cholmondeley is a permanent Lord-in-Waiting, meaning that he is a retired senior official of the Royal Household."

Would the king humiliate the wife of the heir and the next queen, who hasn't put a foot wrong, by shoving in her face the whole family of the woman at the centre of this stupid lie? Do the math.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 421April 6, 2023 3:54 PM

R414, you don’t have to believe anything. But you can fuck off as well. This is a gossip message board, I had gossip well before there was a hint of anything going on. I shared it with my DL friends. Choose to believe, don’t choose to believe. No one gives a shit.

by Anonymousreply 422April 6, 2023 4:02 PM

But but but if I fabricate lies about Catherine and William, then my idol Saint Markle will appear to shine brighter than she already does. Right?

by Anonymousreply 423April 6, 2023 4:29 PM

R415 Feel the love?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 424April 6, 2023 5:12 PM

I enjoy BRF threads, but y’all do reach sometimes with scoping out “tension”. Like, Will might be have a scowl because he’s holding in a fart or something lol

by Anonymousreply 425April 6, 2023 5:16 PM

R415 Google : Love

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 426April 6, 2023 5:17 PM

R415 Authority on " passion receding" .

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 427April 6, 2023 5:27 PM

Exactly, R425, they see what they need to see and try to disguise it in false chill.

by Anonymousreply 428April 6, 2023 6:23 PM

As someone who hates PDA, the way William and Kate are in public doesn’t bother me. Some couples are smoochy, some aren’t. It looks like William inherited Charles’ solemnity and Harry inherited Diana’s—for lack of a better word—smoochiness.

by Anonymousreply 429April 6, 2023 6:38 PM

R427 meet R429

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 430April 6, 2023 7:30 PM

The known cheaters, both with a long history of it, are right at r409.

by Anonymousreply 431April 6, 2023 8:53 PM

R426 really shows just how fucking ugly Meghan really is. That's the worst profile I've ever seen on a woman. Her phoniness also just oozes right through that picture.

by Anonymousreply 432April 6, 2023 8:58 PM

Please stop r422. You're just getting embarrassing now.

by Anonymousreply 433April 6, 2023 9:08 PM

R421, ever heard of Diana? Would he ever humiliate the mother of the heir to the throne, he’s already done it and had no problem doing it.

Most women don’t want their husbands’ mistresses paraded up and down in the most public possible way. Charles was flaunting Camilla in Diana’s face before they were even married. Her family even told her it was too late to back out shortly before the wedding.

My guess is this is Charles’ way of saying, this is my grandchild, I don’t care where he comes from, he’s going to get the advantages of having the favor of the king, even if he can’t be publicly acknowledged for now. And rewarding the cuckholded husband or dishonored father for his discretion with titles and lands, is a long-standing British tradition going back to at least Henry VIII.

As far as Charles being too delicate to put a woman in her place, and reminding Kate that she can shut up and take it, or else she can’t be Queen, when she’s waited for decades and may well wait decades more, of course he would do that. He did it to Diana. If she had shut up and tolerated essentially being a breeding concubine while Camilla got her husband, Diana would be Queen right now.

You forget, they got what they wanted from Kate. She no longer has the high value she did before, William is tired of her and she’s produced his children already. Her leverage is diminished. They bred her, she produced multiple heirs, everything she does from now on either benefits them, or she’s out and it’s Queen Rose, the second wife of William. Charles established that precedent.

These are not the old days, when a king had to stay unhappily married no matter what, and a woman married to the royal heir was guaranteed to one day be Queen. What happened with Diana ended that tradition once and for all. A king can now divorce. Kate doesn’t have a guaranteed seat at the table. They got the kids, and in case of divorce, they will keep them. So she can play ball, or never be Queen. She has no leverage.

So she can tolerate Rose, and any future bastards with her husband, and shut up and smile adoringly at William when the cameras are on, or lose everything.

by Anonymousreply 434April 6, 2023 9:34 PM

R434 is Queen Rose in the room with us, dear?

by Anonymousreply 435April 6, 2023 9:48 PM

R434, the mother of the future queen will never "lose everything". She'll just lose out on being queen.

So if the Rose rumors are true, it's up to Kate to decide what she wants most, when all of her options look good to regular schmoes like me.

by Anonymousreply 436April 6, 2023 10:35 PM

Ginger Whinger et femme still haven't committed one way or another.

They're going to drag this out until last moment I shouldn't wonder. PH is holding HM and the Palace by the short and curlies. Either they give into his demands or else....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 437April 6, 2023 11:00 PM

Enough about Harry and Meg deciding whether to accept the invitation.


THAT is what I want to know!

by Anonymousreply 438April 6, 2023 11:15 PM

IIRC yes, Prince Andrew, Duke of York has been invited however HRH will have no official role nor will be present on balcony with rest of RF afterwards.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 439April 6, 2023 11:21 PM

PH likely is still pushing for himself, wife and possibly children to be present on balcony with rest of RF after coronation service. That's just not going to happen as HM as made it clear in keeping with his vision of slimmed down monarchy it will be "working royals" only.

by Anonymousreply 440April 6, 2023 11:23 PM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 441April 6, 2023 11:23 PM

[quote]My guess is this

Yes, dear. Of course, dear. Whatever you say, dear.

by Anonymousreply 442April 6, 2023 11:26 PM

R434 aka Omid Scobie, you forget one thing. KCIII has developed a very close relationship with Catherine. She was there for him after QE died and showed the same kind of attention on him that she used to shower on Harry before his ham-fisted wife destroyed relations with everyone. He also has become very close to his son and future king William, encouraged by Camilla and Catherine. William shares the kind of decision making with KC beyond anything the the latter had with his mother. The 4 of them are like a team to protect the monarchy. KC would never hurt Catherine that way. He's grown up since Diana's death. He would not embarrass his son either, if there was any truth to this. And it would later humiliate his grandson George as well. Even if he was that thoughtless on his own, Camilla would have talked him out of it. William and Catherine remain more popular and it would show poor judgment to wave something like this in their faces on KC's most important day. The fact that this boy is in the procession wipes out any notion that William has an illegitimate son.

by Anonymousreply 443April 7, 2023 12:05 AM

What should they do? What are the pros and cons for the Sulkssexes in staying home or attending?

by Anonymousreply 444April 7, 2023 12:37 AM

Begging Harry and Meghan to come makes Charles looking even weaker dumber than the perception.

by Anonymousreply 445April 7, 2023 1:53 AM

Go or No Go there's only going to be one star of this show. Suck it up Grannies.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 446April 7, 2023 2:07 AM

Don't think KC3 is going to give in far as PH and his family being on balcony. It would be a colossal bending of the knees from a man who is supposed to be head of BRF.

I mean where will it all end then? Either KC3 wants a slimmed down monarchy or not; HM cannot go around giving into PH every time his son pouts, threatens or blusters.

Considering recent events KC3 and the Palace have been more than accommodating. PH and MM have been invited, told they won't be in nosebleed section of seating for ceremony and far as KC3 is willing to go will be included in family events surrounding the coronation. That other members of BRF view Duke and Duchess of Sussex with distain, despair and maybe disgust is their own doing. PH egged on by that wife of his have made their beds and now must lie in them.

The Ginger Whinger and his tedious wife could opt to do the right British thing by showing up and putting a good face on things. Oh no; they've got to have things their own way and are digging themselves into a deeper hole.

by Anonymousreply 447April 7, 2023 2:11 AM

These two conniving nasty old gits continue to verify everything Harry wrote in Spare. Everything.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 448April 7, 2023 2:27 AM

Someone hasn't read "Spare", or they'd know that Harry wrote far worse thing about himself, than Charles or Cam.

Of course, Harry had no idea he was making himself look bad...

by Anonymousreply 449April 7, 2023 2:38 AM

R447 Only Nuts post in code. YAAN.

by Anonymousreply 450April 7, 2023 2:39 AM

R448 even his mother sending him a video game system released 4 years after her death?

by Anonymousreply 451April 7, 2023 2:40 AM

Deranger/Deplorable Fumigant (extra strength)

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 452April 7, 2023 2:45 AM

My sister, not the world's most intuitive person, said she stopped reading when he referred to himself at Eton as one of the abandoned children there.

by Anonymousreply 453April 7, 2023 3:01 AM

His Majesty loyal subjects express their love yet again.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 454April 7, 2023 4:21 AM


David Cholmondeley, 7th Marquess of Cholmondeley position of Lord Chamberlain to Elizabeth II's household ended when HM died. KC3 was thus free to appoint someone new, which HM has done, The 7th Baron Carrington.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 455April 7, 2023 4:43 AM

Make that "Lord Great Chamberlain".

Carry on.

by Anonymousreply 456April 7, 2023 4:44 AM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 457April 7, 2023 4:45 AM

I don't for a moment believe the William/Rose rumors. He's the future King and could have any beautiful woman he wants. Why on earth would he choose that chinless unattractive woman Rose? She looks like the original Gladys Kravitz from Bewitched.

by Anonymousreply 458April 7, 2023 4:58 AM

" He was an airline pilot, she was an airline stewardess..."

Doors to manual!

by Anonymousreply 459April 7, 2023 5:22 AM

David Rocksavage isn't bad looking from certain angles. He is also next door neighbors with the Prince and Princess of Wales at their Norfolk estate.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 460April 7, 2023 5:49 AM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 461April 7, 2023 5:50 AM

R460 You old white English people literally have no standards do you?

by Anonymousreply 462April 7, 2023 5:51 AM

Wouldn't touch you with a barge pole dearie, that's saying something about standards anyway.

by Anonymousreply 463April 7, 2023 5:57 AM

Royal Grand Potentate Of His Majesty's Most August Shrine

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 464April 7, 2023 5:59 AM

R463 Hasn't touched a pole in decades.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 465April 7, 2023 6:02 AM

R462 Some Englishmen have very high standards.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 466April 7, 2023 6:09 AM

If old English women never have sex then why do their fannys stank so bad?

Asking for a friend.

by Anonymousreply 467April 7, 2023 6:34 AM

Harry is jealous of the Chumleys, you say? Good, choke on your bile littke man.

by Anonymousreply 468April 7, 2023 12:34 PM

The Mail is reporting the Costa del Sulk is on the verge of announcing their decision as to whether or not they will attend. Pathetic children, playing their stupid games.

by Anonymousreply 469April 7, 2023 1:20 PM

R458 - I believe Rose & Prince Peggington had an affair with absolutely no doubts.. However, Prince Peggington is NOT the father of any od Rose's children. All the children greatly resemble the Cholmondeley side of the family

by Anonymousreply 470April 7, 2023 1:30 PM

R460 - David Rocksavage was quite attractive in his younger days. I find Rocksavage, even as an elder dude, to be much more intellectually & physically attractive than Prince Peggington.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 471April 7, 2023 1:34 PM

R416 Sure, sure. He's trolling the daughter in law whose popularity is one of the few aces the monarchy has to play for the next generation, and he wants to embarrass her in front of the world, along with his son and heir - the only son he's got left that he's got a relationship with that's still worth a damn.

Really, you've got brains to burn, haven't you?

The isn't his bastard grandson. On the contrary, what he's acknowledging to the world is that the entire rumour was a crock of shit cooked up by Meghan's allies.

As stated, try again.

by Anonymousreply 472April 7, 2023 1:54 PM

R445 And you know he's "begging" them to come how?

The invitation was extended to satisfy optics that more or less presented a damned if you do, damned if you don't quandary.

Charles opted for the one that left him looking less vindictive, but putting the Sussexes in a box: look like hypocrites if they attend, or admitting the breach with the family is final if they don't.

And, by the way, the balcony lineup was announced a day ago: Meghan and Harry aren't in it.

I dunno, from where I sit, it looks to me like Charles has played this rather well - he's off the Mean Daddy hook, the Harkles look either petulant or opportunistic.

He looks cagey, not weak.

by Anonymousreply 473April 7, 2023 1:58 PM

R470 Unless you were a fly on the wall, you cannot possibly "absolutely have no doubts". The people spreading the rumour were not exactly, shall we say, objective; in fact, there is enough smoke to the Meghan inspired rumours to offset any "absolutely no doubts".

Harry implied that it was Charles and Camilla who put that rumour out there, because they were jealous of William's popularity, which far exceeded (and still does) Charles' in the polls.

If Harry put that out there, you can bet your arse he was trying to deflect from the Swiftt/Coren arrows that led back to Harry's bitch of a wife. Not to mention that it was in Harry's delusional needs to try to drive a wedge between the growing closeness between his father and his brother.

And that's what not only I, but a good many others, have absolutely no doubts about.

Qui bono? Meghan and Harry. Who doesn't? The entire BRF.

Work it out, moron.

by Anonymousreply 474April 7, 2023 2:04 PM

[quote]Camilla is not into jewels

Presumably these are nicotine lozenges.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 475April 7, 2023 2:09 PM

[quote]Harry implied that it was Charles and Camilla who put that rumour out there, because they were jealous of William's popularity, which far exceeded (and still does) Charles' in the polls.

That sounds about his speed.

by Anonymousreply 476April 7, 2023 2:57 PM

You’re really trying to make Peggington happen, aren’t you, R470?

Good luck with that.

by Anonymousreply 477April 7, 2023 3:43 PM

It's a switch from Derangers.

God, the tedium of these people. They're like dog shit on the sidewalk.

by Anonymousreply 478April 7, 2023 3:45 PM

R475 Ya can't polish a turd.

by Anonymousreply 479April 7, 2023 4:47 PM

R472/R473/ R474 Same deranged yank Deplorable thinks she's speaking for a whopping15% of Brits who despise her kind. Are you here because you're between Trump rallies or have your meds run out?. Your hood is showing Lady Karen.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 480April 7, 2023 5:06 PM

R480 Indeed. Her rabid rudeness makes her easily identifiable as a Murican. Perhaps she just fancies herself "royalty".

by Anonymousreply 481April 7, 2023 5:26 PM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 482April 7, 2023 6:37 PM

I don’t know about Murican, but there is no way you can have a civil conversation in these threads, r481. I live in the DL progressive anti-Dump threads and the vitriol from the trolls there is nowhere near the level in these threads, particularly from some of the pro BRF posters. Hey it may only be one, but they always have to pile on a couple of “you morons” when they post.

by Anonymousreply 483April 7, 2023 6:47 PM

Yank or Brit deplorables gotta be deplorables.

by Anonymousreply 484April 7, 2023 6:58 PM

The coming shindig is pretty much the last chance for Sparkles' bots to associate her with the BRF, then it's onward to postin on the gram and feminizin with Gloria.

by Anonymousreply 485April 7, 2023 7:15 PM

Her loyal subjects are flashing her Majesty the V for Victory sigh in support. Touching.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 486April 8, 2023 12:47 AM

Did Diana come into the RF with any money? Trust fund? Or just a title?

I'm reading that as Prince of Wales William's net worth is now 100M due to the Duchy. I would have thought more. Plus whatever his mother left him.

Charles worth 600M now due to recent inheritance from mummy.

What was Harry worth before he got married? I'm going to take with a grain of salt any estimations of his current net worth due to the exaggerated numbers he and his wife's PR machine spin about all their "deals".

by Anonymousreply 487April 8, 2023 2:06 AM

Bulk of late Diana, Princess of Wales money was from divorce settlement. Her father left his estate largely in trust (but did make small provisions for his children and grandchildren IIRC),

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 488April 8, 2023 2:23 AM

Diana and her sisters got some money (no idea the exact sum) but their brother got the bulk. The girls were expected to marry well.

by Anonymousreply 489April 8, 2023 2:32 AM


Which is as it should be. Heir usually needs all he can get to keep those grand piles of stone from crumbling down.

As it was Diana's brother held a huge sale to raise funds for much needed work on family pile.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 490April 8, 2023 2:40 AM

Diana's father once contemplated selling off copies of her iconic wedding gown to make money. He was told to knock it off and plan was scrapped.

by Anonymousreply 491April 8, 2023 2:41 AM

Queen Camilla? I like her style.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 492April 8, 2023 3:00 AM

He doesn’t need grand piles of stone r490. Geez he could do fine with McMansion piles of stone.

by Anonymousreply 493April 8, 2023 3:23 AM

Who are you to say what anybody needs, R493?

by Anonymousreply 494April 8, 2023 4:19 AM

This thread is bonkers.

by Anonymousreply 495April 8, 2023 4:37 AM

R494, sorry, am I missing the sarcasm gene? Or are you serious?

by Anonymousreply 496April 8, 2023 4:39 AM

The Sussexes brand is ascending the Windsor brand is circling the drain. Why would Harry and Megan want to soil themselves by appearing with these losers? Staying home in America is the smart move.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 497April 8, 2023 4:42 AM

R434 is mentally ill. Is that you Meghan? Projecting again?

by Anonymousreply 498April 8, 2023 11:12 AM

R497 everyone knows that position was bought. Everyone is chuckling about all her "awards" she's buying. Always the Sunshine Sachs connection with every single one. They are huge laughingstocks here. Decent people won't go near them. Hollywood isn't interested.

by Anonymousreply 499April 8, 2023 11:22 AM

[quote]Passion recedes in all long partnerships, especially after women give birth and get, as nature directs they should, get absorbed in infants

Passion recedes in all long partnerships, especially after women give birth and and their vaginas turn into the chunnel.

by Anonymousreply 500April 8, 2023 11:28 AM

Sunshine Sachs did themselves a huge disservice by representing the diabolical duo. Oddly, even more so than they did by representing Harvey Weinstein which isn't as widely known as their Sussex relationship.

Now everyone who has ever read about these two, and they are hard to escape, knows about Sunshine Sachs and their tactics and connections. I didn't know before the Sussex soap opera that Sunshine has connections at Time magazine thus the meritless Time cover and award for the Harkles. But I know now as do many others.

PR firms need to fly under the radar so their machinations for their clients aren't so obvious. Sunshine exposed themselves via the Harkles and that's not a good thing. Previously the average gossip reader was easily bamboozled by PR smoke and mirrors but now thanks to the Harkles the PR veil has been lifted and celebrity PR spin is easily recognized and not as easily sold. Also, Ken Sunshine looks like a major creep.

by Anonymousreply 501April 8, 2023 12:21 PM

Read recently (linked here? Can’t remember) that MM “approached” Steinem, something about making calls to get out the vote. That’s how they met. I have no idea if the elderly GS is still busy or sitting home all by her lonesome but if Megs has a shred of decency, she’ll continue to call and chat after she has received her award and not just drop her.

by Anonymousreply 502April 8, 2023 2:29 PM

CONSIDERING sleeping with a married man whose wife doesn’t understand him? Girlfriends warning you it won’t work out? Look who’s Queen now, bitches.

On the surface, it was a classic case. He’s all like ‘My marriage is a sham’ and ‘We haven’t been intimate in years’ and ‘We’re only together for the children and the future of the hereditary monarchy’.

But what can I say? I looked into those blue eyes and I trusted him. I believed that this man, this future King, didn’t just want to be in and out of me all day like a tampon but for us to be together.

From that day I vowed to destabilise his marriage, whether by tapping the phones at Kensington Palace or tipping off the press about her stalking that art dealer. Even better, we did it together.

It wasn’t easy when she started flinging shit in public, and the kids have never warmed to me, but my whispers of ‘That younger one’s a right diva, just like her’ paid off and he’s practically disinherited now.

We married, we cycled through a number of titles that his domineering mother and the resentful public were willing to accept, and next month he’s crowned at Westminster Abbey and I’ll be there as Queen. Not Queen Consort. Not King’s Concubine. Queen.

So ladies, if you’ve identified a married man of sufficient status naive enough to be pussystruck, ignore the warnings and have that affair. It worked for me

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 503April 8, 2023 4:52 PM

Why Charlie & Side-Piece are desperate to have the Sussexes at their chubbly. They are the only STARS they've got.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 504April 8, 2023 5:11 PM

^ Bloody hell Meghan blows away Mumbles Middleton.

by Anonymousreply 505April 8, 2023 5:12 PM

R503 Lesson well learned dear.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 506April 8, 2023 5:20 PM

^Thank you Meg and Haz, always nice to hear your latest round of WAAGGH.

by Anonymousreply 507April 8, 2023 7:09 PM

Not sure why people are posting that Rose is ugly, I find her very attractive. Better looking than Kate TBH.

by Anonymousreply 508April 8, 2023 7:34 PM

R508 Not sayin much.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 509April 8, 2023 7:59 PM

R501 Do tell gran.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 510April 8, 2023 8:04 PM

Is your Grindr in braille?

by Anonymousreply 511April 8, 2023 8:42 PM

Here's Rose Hanbury as a younger woman, and of course the eye of the Datalounge looks at that girl and things she's plain with tragic hair.

However, a straight man would look at her and see great big tits on a tall slim frame, a pretty enough face, long hair, and a come-hither smile! To me she looks like the sort of girl who is pretty but not beautiful, but who could have any straight man she wanted.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 512April 9, 2023 12:54 AM

I see Megsy is here with the pegging. We can see the slime trails from her prolapsed vagina and anus that she drags after her.

by Anonymousreply 513April 9, 2023 2:23 AM

^If she's not a lesbian, she's a tragic fuck artist then...

by Anonymousreply 514April 9, 2023 2:23 AM

I meant Rose at r514.

by Anonymousreply 515April 9, 2023 2:28 AM

Sarah Ferguson did both flowers and jeweled tiara at her wedding.

Future Duchess of York wanted just flowers, but was informed she "had" to wear a tiara so a compromise was reached.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 516April 9, 2023 2:46 AM

Put it on speed dial for R513

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 517April 9, 2023 2:48 AM

R513 really stinking up the joint special spritz of Deranger Fumigant for you gran

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 518April 9, 2023 2:56 AM

Didn't the compromise involve purchasing a tiara of her very own from Royal jewelers Garrard's, r516? A tiara not seen in decades, not even on her daughters' heads at their respective weddings and presumed to be privately sold to cover her debts...

by Anonymousreply 519April 9, 2023 3:15 AM

"Sarah Ferguson did both flowers and jeweled tiara at her wedding."

Well that actually worked. She came into the church and stood at the altar wearing flowers in her hair, like a proper commoner, and then she went off to sign the book and re-appeared in a tiara, to signify that she had just become a princess! I thought and still think that it was a nice little piece of wardrobe drama.

I heard that the royal family later bought her a tiara of their own, which at the time I thought was very nice. Of course it was just because they didn't trust her with any of theirs.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 520April 9, 2023 4:21 AM

They do say like Diana, Sarah was allowed to keep jewels she received as gifts during her marriage to Duke of York, including that tiara which was a gift from Elizabeth II and Prince Phillip.

Sarah, Duchess of York has worn that tiara in years since her divorce.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 521April 9, 2023 4:24 AM

Sarah Ferguson's jewels went missing after a visit to New York City, Elizabeth II and BRF were not amused.

Jewels were stolen and subsequently found in possession of a teenaged luggage handler at JFK airport who saw his chance

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 522April 9, 2023 4:28 AM

"Describing the crime as 'near comical' and its perpetrator as a misguided but 'decent fellow,' a Federal judge sentenced a 21-year-old former baggage handler to four years' probation yesterday for rifling through an airplane cargo hold and stealing jewelry that he later learned belonged to the Duchess of York.

The theft set off an international manhunt last summer after Sarah Ferguson, the divorced Duchess, discovered that the necklace and bracelet were missing after returning to Britain from a visit to the United States.

British newspapers seized on the incident as yet another embarrassment for the royal family after the Duchess's lady-in-waiting admitted that she had put the jewels, a wedding gift from Queen Elizabeth II worth $375,000, along with other luggage in an unlocked zipper bag."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 523April 9, 2023 4:29 AM

HM and BRF were incensed at Fergie for many reasons including down right carelessness.

While it long has been fairly common for lady's maids or in-waiting to royal, noble or even just well off women to have charge of jewels when traveling such things are normally kept on their person, not packed away in luggage where things can easily go walkabout.

Recall in "Upstairs/Downstairs" the shell shocked lady's maid to (now deceased) Lady Marjorie who died when Titanic sunk refused to let go of the jewel case of her late late mistress. Poor woman held onto thing for dear life both while being evacuated onto lifeboats, sitting out in water, rescue, arrival in North America and then trip back to UK. That's loyalty.....

by Anonymousreply 524April 9, 2023 4:34 AM

Back in 2010 story was that Fergie was "forced" to pawn good part of her jewels to stave off bankruptcy.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 525April 9, 2023 4:36 AM

"Poor woman held onto thing [jewelbox] for dear life both while being evacuated onto lifeboats, sitting out in water, rescue, arrival in North America and then trip back to UK. That's loyalty....."

Honey, that's not loyalty, that's FEAR.

In those days if a rich person lost anything, the first thing they'd do is accuse some poor servant of theft, and fire them with no references, making them unemployable and dooming them to a life of homelessness and crime. And yes, if a lady's maid survived a disaster and her mistress and her mistress's jewels did not, there were excellent odds that that maid would be accused of theft, and either made unemployable or jailed. So the only way that poor woman could avoid suspicion, and continue to work in her field, was to return the damn jewels to the family.

by Anonymousreply 526April 9, 2023 5:12 AM

Go watch Upstairs/Downstairs.

Miss Roberts (or just "Roberts") like many lady's maids then and since was devoted to her mistress. Unlike the scheming and evil O'Brien of Downton Abbey Roberts was above reproach. As that parlour maid in "Gosford Park" quip's sort of maid who thought one of her mistresses farts was more important then death of her father.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 527April 9, 2023 5:23 AM

It will come out when Fergie dies whether or not she sold the tiara. It was pretty rare for the BRF to buy a new tiara in those days--they had seemed pretty much as if they had enough of them by that point. But they still bought her a nice one.

Poor Sophie Edinburgh got such a shitty tiara Edward designed himself from bits of old ones to w ear for her wedding, and I was surprised the Queen (who apparently loved her dearly) didn't give her a nicer one.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 528April 9, 2023 5:29 AM

Fortunately later Edward (probably with the help of his mother's money) bought Sophie the Wessex Aquamarine Necklace Tiara, which is one of the most beautiful of all tiaras the BRF owns. It looks fantastic on her--the giant aquamarine sets off her eyes.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 529April 9, 2023 5:32 AM

" It was pretty rare for the BRF to buy a new tiara in those days--they had seemed pretty much as if they had enough of them by that point."

Not really; either Elizabeth II or someone bought the Poltimore Tiara for Princess Margaret. After HRH's death it among other jewels belonging to decedent were sold off by heirs to pay death taxes. Rumor has it some Asian git bought much of what was on offer or at leas the Poltimore tiara and it has sat in that private collection ever since.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 530April 9, 2023 5:35 AM

As made clear in this thread and elsewhere families both royal and noble usually have two sets of jewels. Ones that are held in trust and belong to "the family" as it were, then you have personal items given to or purchased by a royal, wife or daughter of a peer, etc...

Since estates passed between monarch to heir are not subject to death duties it makes sense for Windsor (or Windsor-Mountbatten) jewels to remain property of sovereign. Other jewels are part of crown estate and thus not personal property of monarch per se.

It is understood royal and noble wives are required at times to deck themselves out as it were. When royals only married other royals such brides would be given jewels at time of their engagement or marriage and subsequent gifts that would make up their personal property. Again there were "family stones" and jewels but those were often locked up in trusts. Ditto applied or applies to those marrying into nobility.

Imagine having always to run to Elizabeth II or now Camilla every time wanting or needing jewels.

Thing is now outside of monarch royals pay death duties as do nobles with end of fee entail. Since UK death duties basically almost encompass everything owned by decedent you can see where having tons of jewels as personal property becomes a liability.

Heirs of Princess Margaret weren't first nor last who had to sell up family jewels among other precious assets to pay off death duties. That and or when a family needed money to shore up their estates including doing work on those grand family piles.

End of fee entail wasn't bad as many would think; many welcomed the chance to finally sell up assets formerly tied up in trusts for generations for ready money.

by Anonymousreply 531April 9, 2023 5:50 AM

Easter Perp Walk

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 532April 9, 2023 3:22 PM

It wasn't clever on the other thread either, goober.

by Anonymousreply 533April 9, 2023 3:35 PM

Are any DLer's going to be celebrating the Coronation in London, out on the streets and in the park? I can't really afford it, but have been thinking it would be a once in a life time thing to go to London for the weekend just to be part of this big event as a royal fan. It would be a long trip from CA for the event. I've lived in London, so I know the city gets crammed when big events happen, especially the tube. Is it worth $5000 for a long weekend? I'm Williams age, so that would be the Coronation that I would love to attend but who knows what and where I'll at that point in life, Or maybe it would be a huge hassle and waste of money.

by Anonymousreply 534April 9, 2023 7:41 PM

Isn't it kind of late to book accommodations?

by Anonymousreply 535April 9, 2023 7:48 PM

I found the entire RF's Easter outfits disappointing today. Charlotte's dress looked like a plain school dress. Louis also looked like he was in school uniform. Catherine has worn that same coat dress or some version of it a million times. Why was Euge walking behind Charles coming out of the church? Isn't there some kind of order to these things?

I wonder what Easter was like at Casa de Montecito? Did they once again fly in the Archbishop of Los Angeles and conduct a private sunrise service in their backyard by their entangled palm trees that represent their love? Did they make waffles for breakfast on the waffle iron the late Queen supposedly sent His Majesty Prince Archie of Riverdale? Did Meg roast a chicken for lunch? Did Oprah send the phantom children Easter baskets filled with all of her favorite things?

by Anonymousreply 536April 9, 2023 8:00 PM

R534... I will be in London from the 4th to the 7th. We're trying to figure out what we're going to do. Initially I was for it, then bored, now thinking if we go we better be there early enough to get a decent view on the Mall.

by Anonymousreply 537April 9, 2023 8:07 PM

[quote] Charlotte's dress looked like a plain school dress.

Charlotte has like 2 dresses. This one feels like it has been recycled mutilple times and then she has the black one for the late Queen's funeral.

Charlotte and George are getting tall. George's head is almost at Charles shoulder and Charlotte is catching up to Kate, even in heels. I love Zara but she looks light she might have gained a little bit of weight and her dress was ill fitting. I did not care for Sophie's look with the boots. Ann looked surprisingly nice in the cream coat dress with a ERII style hat. Mike looks like the fucking alpha bull ready to breed my hole like his does all the time. I liked the "Why are you so quiet. What did we do?" to the rota.

by Anonymousreply 538April 9, 2023 8:15 PM

They all dress pretty horrendously. I thinking this is what British wear for occasions.

by Anonymousreply 539April 9, 2023 8:57 PM

^ was

by Anonymousreply 540April 10, 2023 12:44 AM

Just doing jobs Americans won't do r522.

by Anonymousreply 541April 10, 2023 3:50 AM

Happy Easter from our Happy Family to yours.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 542April 10, 2023 4:48 AM

R538 “Charlotte has like 2 dresses” - like, totally!

by Anonymousreply 543April 10, 2023 5:05 AM

Are George and Louis the last children in Britain, to be stuck in short pants until they start univiersity?

by Anonymousreply 544April 10, 2023 6:07 AM

R544 they are children of the English upper classes. Only in short trousers until they turn 8. I haven’t noticed too many Oxbridge undergraduates in shorts and long socks.

But you would know that, as you pretend to be English, don’t you? Why would you do that, R544, when you are so clearly American?

Now I’ll let you get back to trying to make “Hyacinth”, “Deranger”, “Klan Grannie” and “Prince Peggington” happen.

Not having a lot of luck with those are you, you dumb fuck American? I’ll ask again - why do you give a fuck about the British Royal Family?

by Anonymousreply 545April 10, 2023 7:02 AM

Where r542? What happy family?

by Anonymousreply 546April 10, 2023 7:42 AM

Yes, R545, I am American, and I never pretended to be British. What the fuck crawled up your ass.

by Anonymousreply 547April 10, 2023 8:38 AM

This thread is slowing down…anyone up for starting a new one? I recommend blocking r545, that was uncalled for. Like I posted upthread, there are a few trolls on here you can’t have a civilized conversation with, and it’s one of them.

R545, forums, you see, are free for anyone to post any opinion they have in them. You’re not the thread police. Go start your own forum if you want to be.

by Anonymousreply 548April 10, 2023 1:05 PM

Btw, use trolldar on r545 and you’ll see most of their posts are insults to other posters for having a different opinion.

by Anonymousreply 549April 10, 2023 1:09 PM

R545 We rest our case luv,

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 550April 10, 2023 5:24 PM

Special intravenous dose of Deranger Fumigant for you Hyacinth R545.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 551April 10, 2023 5:30 PM

Do you Royalassts have any self awareness at all? Do you not know how ridiculously antediluvial all you blather about jewels,bloodlines,titles, bloody short pants sounds to folks who live in 21st century real world. It's like listening to ten year olds go on about the minutiae in the Wizard of OZ . Wouldn't it be more entertaining for you to become Disney Kweens? You'd get a cheaper better parade for your quid.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 552April 10, 2023 6:19 PM

But is it egg-proof?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 553April 10, 2023 10:43 PM

R548 and R549 if I posted on DL when other people have views that I disagree with I wouldn’t get much else done. On the contrary my postings are usually in response to misinformation posted by people who should know better but don’t, and, lately, in response to Americans who overrun the BRF threads and who feel the need to let everyone know that they think the British monarchy is hopeless/racist/misogynist/undemocratic etc and that they have no interest in the BRF. When I ask why they think that, they cannot respond with anything other than the same 3 or 4 pictures of the BRF looking frightful (of course nobody here has taken a bad picture), a Camilla horse joke, something about tampons, something about the Marchioness of Cholmondeley, something about pegging and that old favourite - something about British teeth. Nothing factual or robust beyond “We fought a war to get rid of the monarchy!”. When I then ask why they are here in a thread for which they allegedly have no interest the response is always deafening silence.

So trolldar me all that you want, but in the meantime try to acquire some actual knowledge instead of trying to make “Hyacinth”, “Klan Grannies”, “Prince Peggington”, “Tampon King” and “Horsemilla” etc happen. You surely have more in your life than that. And if not, that’s pretty sad, but no huge surprise.

by Anonymousreply 554April 11, 2023 7:47 AM

Not formatted correctly but here’s some of the wit and wisdom of r554. Believe me, it’s just a small sample. Muriel, why has this poster not been banned? It seems to really hate DL’ers. Btw r554 I don’t see a lot of intellectual/analytical/rational responses here, if you’re “responding to misinformation.”

“It’s always entertaining to hear Americans banging on about something about which they know so little. But about which they assume to know so much. Always. Always. Always. You people are so stupid, which is why we laugh at you. Always.”

“It’s incomprehensible to you because you have no idea of how the British upper classes operate, and why should you? You’re a shallow parochial vacuous American. Your opinion doesn’t matter to anybody but yourself.“

“Very clever response, especially for an American, R305 - I know that you people have trouble with reading, writing and finding out things for yourselves. Have a lovely day!”

’R385 can you post that again, but in English this time?“

“It’s incomprehensible to you because you have no idea of how the British upper classes operate, and why should you? You’re a shallow parochial vacuous American. Your opinion doesn’t matter to anybody but yourself.“

by Anonymousreply 555April 11, 2023 1:13 PM

…and it looks like r545’s post has been blocked into oblivion. As it should be. FF’ing this poster as well. I don’t get it why, why post on an American forum if you hate American opinions so much?

by Anonymousreply 556April 11, 2023 1:18 PM

It’s not an American forum.

by Anonymousreply 557April 11, 2023 2:58 PM

[quote]Countdown to Coronation of Charles III

I thought he died. No?

by Anonymousreply 558April 11, 2023 3:01 PM

And if it was an American forum (which it isn't), so what? We have to be nice to the host country or else? Are you sure it's not a North Korean forum?

by Anonymousreply 559April 11, 2023 3:07 PM

R557 and r559, yes, it’s an international forum. I was really only trying to point out that OP is disparaging Americans on a forum whose company is based in the US, and then saying we have no right to comment on the BRF because we’re American.

by Anonymousreply 560April 11, 2023 3:16 PM

I won't argue you have no right to comment on BRF threads, R560, because you do. No question. But, to the disparaging point, so what? You guys are already disparaging the UK as pointed out. You can't argue that summary of "they cannot respond with anything other than the same 3 or 4 pictures of the BRF looking frightful (of course nobody here has taken a bad picture), a Camilla horse joke, something about tampons, something about the Marchioness of Cholmondeley, something about pegging and that old favourite - something about British teeth." So who disparaged first?

Honestly, the only thing I really can't stand about DL is the Yankee Doodle hypocrisy. You dish it out but refuse to take it. Even the hardest left Democrats on here have that greatest nation on earth bullshit coded in their DNA. It's tiresome and if you're smart it's a lie and if you're stupid it's a delusion.

by Anonymousreply 561April 11, 2023 3:22 PM

[quote]It's tiresome and if you're smart it's a lie and if you're stupid it's a delusion.

You're no fucking ray of sunshine yourself, sunshine.

by Anonymousreply 562April 11, 2023 3:25 PM

Thanks for nothing, R562.

by Anonymousreply 563April 11, 2023 3:31 PM

Block and report r561. We might be disparaging toward the BRF but that’s our right and it’s fun. You however choose to respond by insulting and disparaging the poster. You just don’t see the difference, do you.

Also, for all of our sake, someone start a new thread! Please!

by Anonymousreply 564April 11, 2023 3:34 PM

Poor R561.... someone was insulted and disparaged on Datalounge? Oh, the humanity.

And here's your news thread, dear. Just for you.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 565April 11, 2023 3:45 PM

Sorry, R565 was meant for the benefit of poor R564. Idiocy and I see red.

I hope that's not too insulting and disparaging for you, old pet.

by Anonymousreply 566April 11, 2023 3:48 PM

LOL... R564 is R560... do you always defend yourself in the third person? Or are you just clumsy when trying to execute deceit?

by Anonymousreply 567April 11, 2023 3:49 PM

R567, yes I made both of those posts? Did you get lost on your way to making sense? In neither of those posts did I refer to myself in the third person.

Again, DL’ers, block and FF r561. The troll still does not get it. Feel free to insult the BRF or any topic on this forum, but not a DL poster or member. You don’t belong here. You’re a remnant from annother board that probably tossed you.

And btw, r561 is also the Pet Troll! FF’d and ignored from this point forward.

by Anonymousreply 568April 11, 2023 4:50 PM

Yes, yes. Everybody's going to listen to you, dear.

by Anonymousreply 569April 11, 2023 4:54 PM

…and the air is much cleaner in here now!

by Anonymousreply 570April 11, 2023 5:22 PM

R569: You’re not the thread police. Go start your own forum if you want to be.

Recognize that quote? You wrote it.

by Anonymousreply 571April 11, 2023 5:24 PM

R570... I have him on block now and buggered up the numbers.

by Anonymousreply 572April 11, 2023 5:25 PM

^ Obviously the vermin are becoming resistant to Deranger Fumigant let's try industrial strength.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 573April 11, 2023 6:35 PM

Don't those posts just change everything?!?

The beast cannot be tamed.

by Anonymousreply 574April 11, 2023 6:41 PM

R555 Dear you're a toady of King Tampon of Grand Fenwick aka Formerly Great Britain .

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 575April 11, 2023 6:41 PM

Bleachers going up.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 576April 11, 2023 7:16 PM

Obvious why Captain Harry had three combat tours in Afghanistan and Wimpy Willie was kept home. It's a man's job Hyacinth.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 577April 11, 2023 7:21 PM

Charlie was "hunting for mushrooms" while Mummy was gasping her last breath. Windsors are bloody shite humans as are their groveling royalist toadies.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 578April 11, 2023 7:29 PM

R577 I thought William passed his pilot's exam and Harry failed?

by Anonymousreply 579April 11, 2023 8:19 PM

Small wonder if you were choosing cannon fodder that you'd send Harry multiple times.

by Anonymousreply 580April 11, 2023 8:33 PM


Seriously, I have the highest regard for people who do search and rescue, or who do other things that involve taking risks and doing manly things to *save* others, not kill them. That's what I want in a man!

by Anonymousreply 581April 12, 2023 12:40 AM

R579 Harry was not allowed to re up for a third tour in Afghanistan because he was priority target and therefore a danger to his squadron. He was a a Co-Pilot and gunner in Apache helicopters Obviously he Capt. Harry was qualified to fly them and did. He wanted to continue in that capacity and could have but Taliban found his location and would target any fellow soldiers around him. He was recalled by Northwood HQ in London very much against his wishes.. He did now want to work a "desk job" so he separated from active duty. The "Harry flunked his test" has been repeatedly denied by his instructors and even his commanding officer but people believe the tabs . That's what makes quid.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 582April 12, 2023 12:41 AM

R581 We know Rosie.

by Anonymousreply 583April 12, 2023 12:50 AM

Why is he shaking hands with Robin Leach?

by Anonymousreply 584April 12, 2023 1:02 AM

R581 Willie rescued my puss when it was in danger and continues to do so. RESPECT!

by Anonymousreply 585April 12, 2023 1:08 AM

R585 That's one puss I'd leave up the tree.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 586April 12, 2023 1:18 AM

^ William is a Popeye fan. Who knew.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 587April 12, 2023 1:20 AM

Proves that Williy has his Pa's bad taste in fugly side-pieces.

by Anonymousreply 588April 12, 2023 1:24 AM

Rosie's the peg of my heart.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 589April 12, 2023 1:46 AM

Palace releases Official Coronation Emoji !

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 590April 12, 2023 3:54 AM



Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 591April 12, 2023 4:13 PM

Only reason to tune in this circus. Harry will show these clowns what a real King looks like.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 592April 12, 2023 4:45 PM

He's flying in for the coronation ceremony only. An hour tops. Flying right back to California. With the time difference he 'll be back to see Archie blow out his birthday candles. Well played Papa.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 593April 12, 2023 4:50 PM

Harry is doing his duty as he always has. He's protecting his wife and children from the bile It's a big win for the Sussex brand The optics will be great for him. He'll be the only one the media focuses on. Even wearing his pajamas he'd upstage that pathetic lot.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 594April 12, 2023 4:55 PM

How hard is to upstage this...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 595April 12, 2023 5:06 PM

First I wondered what stunt Meghan would pull on Coronation Day to divert attention from the event to her. Obviously it will be Archie's birthday. But then I wondered if part of the whole negotiation included something about Meghan not being able to do anything to divert attention otherwise...... what would the otherwise be? I still think she'll pull some stunt anyway. Girl has no shame.

by Anonymousreply 596April 12, 2023 8:55 PM

One last blast of Deranger Fumigant before we close this loony bin.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 597April 13, 2023 2:03 AM

The main loon went off to play with herself and insult DL posters in thread II.

by Anonymousreply 598April 13, 2023 2:10 AM

So they don't want to attend the coronation together because they're afraid of slights and snubs? Fucking weenies!

If you're gonna be the black sheep of your family, OWN the black sheep role! Go on a long pub crawl on coronation night if they want you to be the family black sheep, tell everyone you meet that your relatives are a bunch of snooty assholes be photographed throwing up on the sidewalk, make them wish they'd stayed on your good side!

by Anonymousreply 599April 13, 2023 4:35 PM

[quote] If you're gonna be the black sheep of your family, OWN the black sheep role!

Who said black? Recollections may vary.

by Anonymousreply 600April 13, 2023 5:36 PM

THANK YOU to all the Klan Grannies for letting us live rent free in your empty heads.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 601April 13, 2023 5:37 PM
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!