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.

King Charles has cancer Part 2

Let's continue to discuss here!

by Anonymousreply 561April 10, 2024 3:56 PM

So, can KC3 create William Regent or does it have to go through Parliament?

by Anonymousreply 1February 8, 2024 5:39 PM

I’m regent bitches. You cunts better bow.

by Anonymousreply 2February 8, 2024 5:52 PM

r1 I'm not sure Charles would legally be allowed to appoint his own regent since weirdly that would indicate he's still capable. But you wouldn't need an act anyway you'd just need this to happen "the Sovereign’s spouse, the Lord Chancellor, Lord Chief Justice, Master of the Rolls, and Speaker of the House of Commons (as of February 2024, these are the Queen, Alex Chalk MP, Baroness (Sue) Carr, Sir Geoffrey Vos and Sir Lindsay Hoyle MP). Any declaration of incapacity needs to be signed by three or more of them. Declarations need to be supported by evidence including medical evidence."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 3February 8, 2024 5:55 PM

Regency would have to be approved by Parliament.

It is unlikely C3 would make William regent unless things get much worse.

by Anonymousreply 4February 8, 2024 5:55 PM

It’s CR not C3 or (shudder) KC3.

by Anonymousreply 5February 8, 2024 5:58 PM

Please pray🙏 for our beloved monarch! He is bravely hanging on by his swollen fingertips!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 6February 8, 2024 6:11 PM

[quote] Let's continue to discuss here!

Omigosh!

by Anonymousreply 7February 8, 2024 6:59 PM

[quote] In five years William will likely be King William V.

But not in ten.

by Anonymousreply 8February 8, 2024 7:34 PM

I just read an interesting, and from my experience accurate, quote:

"A narcissist wants the authority of a king while having the accountability of a toddler".

I think that also describes the Montecito menaces well.

by Anonymousreply 9February 8, 2024 8:24 PM

I read it's bladder cancer

by Anonymousreply 10February 8, 2024 8:28 PM

^ Believable he's such a piss poor King.

by Anonymousreply 11February 8, 2024 8:53 PM

^boo

by Anonymousreply 12February 8, 2024 9:07 PM

OP Get back to us when Charlie's a No Longer Surviving Angel.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 13February 8, 2024 9:09 PM

I still do a double take when I hear Camilla referred to as the Queen. There was a headline on the BBC saying that the Queen says Charles is doing well, and I briefly wondered where they found a medium.

by Anonymousreply 14February 8, 2024 9:12 PM

r5, get fucked, you knew who I was talking about, even if I called him Chuckie. Chuckie, son of Betty and Phil.

by Anonymousreply 15February 8, 2024 9:13 PM

[quote] get fucked

Yes, please.

by Anonymousreply 16February 8, 2024 9:15 PM

r9 Perfectly so. Their fantasies are extremely childish but they seem incapable of adjusting to the reality their fantasy won't come true.

by Anonymousreply 17February 8, 2024 9:23 PM

Willy swaying like the angry drunk he is😮

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 18February 8, 2024 10:18 PM

Because a 76yo with cancer is immortal. Especially if he's "royalty. 😂

by Anonymousreply 19February 8, 2024 10:24 PM

Willy swaying like a candle in the wind.

by Anonymousreply 20February 8, 2024 10:25 PM

New Royal poll out today. Prince William remains the most popular royal, Catherine and then the King.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 21February 8, 2024 10:30 PM

The whole lot of them are boozers. Willy,Kate,Camilla,Andrew,Charlie,Margaret,Queen Mum. Worthless pissed drunks all.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 22February 8, 2024 10:34 PM

Whenever the monarchy is circling the drain the" Palace "commissions a new "Royal" poll and it always shows how "beloved and popular they are among the 200 pensioners that were polled. Remember when Willy was proclaimed the most "respected" leader in the Whole Wide World?. Of course royalass lap it up. Comedy gold.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 23February 8, 2024 10:43 PM

R14 I had the same reaction because there was only one queen and she is no longer with us.

by Anonymousreply 24February 8, 2024 10:54 PM

You Megstans are VILE ! It is well known the HRH Duke of Cambridge has an INNER EAR INBALACE. The poor man suffers with Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (BPPV).It is believed HRH contracted this when he heroically rescued a drowning man during his service as RAF Search and Rescue pilot. To imply that his swaying back and forth on a solid floor has anything to do with drinking is an INSULT to all veterans!!!

by Anonymousreply 25February 8, 2024 10:56 PM

^

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 26February 8, 2024 11:01 PM

Where was I on that approval rating list?

by Anonymousreply 27February 8, 2024 11:02 PM

My nephew was unbalanced because he is not used to walking in heels like me.

by Anonymousreply 28February 8, 2024 11:07 PM

By existing law, William is automatically the regent if a regency is declared; Charles doesn't choose the Regent. The designation of someone else as regent would require the passage of a new law. I can imagine that happening when William is king, just in case anything should happen to him while George is still a minor: no one wants Harry, the next adult in line for the throne, to serve as regent, except perhaps his wife.

by Anonymousreply 29February 8, 2024 11:29 PM

Is it cervical cancer?

I hope not. It can be deadly!

by Anonymousreply 30February 8, 2024 11:41 PM

William was swaying because the royal yacht was in rough seas. DUMBO!

by Anonymousreply 31February 8, 2024 11:54 PM

Apparently Kate too suffers from vertigo. It must be a "royal disease". Awful.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 32February 9, 2024 12:07 AM

^ Was that why she was in the hospital for two weeks?

by Anonymousreply 33February 9, 2024 12:08 AM

Wouldn't a regency only be called for if he was underage? I think that at 75 he's well beyond that

by Anonymousreply 34February 9, 2024 12:37 AM

R34 has never heard of George IV's position before his ascent to the throne.

by Anonymousreply 35February 9, 2024 12:54 AM

[quote]Where was I on that approval rating list?

They're afraid to ask, Your Royal Highness.

by Anonymousreply 36February 9, 2024 1:05 AM

A regency can occur both when the monarch is under 18 and when the monarch is unable to perform the functions of the monarch. When George III finally lost touch with reality permanently, his son became regent. The son later inherited the throne as George IV.

by Anonymousreply 37February 9, 2024 1:58 AM

The 25th amendment had what is the U.S. version of a regency.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 38February 9, 2024 2:17 AM

[quote]"A narcissist wants the authority of a king while having the accountability of a toddler".

Nicely put, I'm gonna hire that writer for my campaign team!

by Anonymousreply 39February 9, 2024 5:29 AM

R39 He's already on my team! Cheers!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 40February 9, 2024 6:16 AM

R39 DJT? I don't know him.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 41February 9, 2024 6:20 AM

🤝

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 42February 9, 2024 9:10 AM

Calling Camilla a cancer is a bit harsh. Butt ugly, yes.

by Anonymousreply 43February 9, 2024 11:19 AM

[quote] I can imagine that happening when William is king, just in case anything should happen to him while George is still a minor

Not an issue, I assure you.

by Anonymousreply 44February 9, 2024 2:21 PM

R42 Biden thought he was greeting George VI.

by Anonymousreply 45February 9, 2024 5:30 PM

r43, true, as she is more like an incurable venereal disease like Genital Herpes.

You just can't get rid of the Herps, but you can marry it.

by Anonymousreply 46February 9, 2024 5:45 PM

r23 Where is your evidence that the Palace commissioned a poll and then manipulated its results??

by Anonymousreply 47February 9, 2024 6:01 PM

Kate is worried about William taking on too much work but is fine with Charles having cancer? What a fucking lazy insensitive cunt.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 48February 9, 2024 6:56 PM

“Princess Kate Middleton? “ Really? It’s not that hard, people.

by Anonymousreply 49February 9, 2024 6:59 PM

Charles and now OJ with his cancer diagnosis. Another thing linking them; two men who regretted marrying flighty blondes.

by Anonymousreply 50February 9, 2024 8:59 PM

So the rumors are Charles has bladder cancer and Kate has ovarian cancer?

by Anonymousreply 51February 9, 2024 9:07 PM

So the Queen dies and everything goes to hell. The family is crumbling the Muslims take over the city and the universities where the anti-semites breed like rabbits destroy everything with their DEI agenda.

by Anonymousreply 52February 9, 2024 9:13 PM

Never heard the rumor about Kate and ovarian cancer. That would be incredibly devastating if true. That’s like pancreatic cancer, it’s usually caught too late.

by Anonymousreply 53February 9, 2024 9:14 PM

R52,d I’d you take a wrong turn on your way to LieSocial? Damn the trolls are trying to infest DL, they’re like cockroaches. Nothing kills them.

by Anonymousreply 54February 9, 2024 9:15 PM

^Did you…

by Anonymousreply 55February 9, 2024 9:16 PM

R49 I do love how “Princess Kate Middleton” is worried about the “psychic” toll this is having on Prince William.

Gotta love Fox News!

by Anonymousreply 56February 9, 2024 9:29 PM

Thank you R37, that was helpful (unlike the twat R35). When do counsellors of state come in then?

by Anonymousreply 57February 9, 2024 9:32 PM

R54 Came from bacteria in a petri dish. He was found in a refrigerator in a high school biology class.

by Anonymousreply 58February 9, 2024 9:51 PM

R35 is funny, as if anyone gives a shit or even remembers George IV.

by Anonymousreply 59February 9, 2024 9:55 PM

Fuck you, r59

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 60February 9, 2024 10:03 PM

SEETH KLAN GRANIES . SEETH.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 61February 9, 2024 10:06 PM

SUCK IT UP YOU DERANGED CUNTS😂

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 62February 9, 2024 10:07 PM

I wish.

by Anonymousreply 63February 9, 2024 10:12 PM

R57, this is R37. Counsellors of State are appointed by the monarch to take over his or her constitutional duties while the monarch is temporarily incapacitated or out of the country, although there are restrictions to the Counsellors' authority (e.g., the Counsellors of State cannot dissolve parliament without the monarch's express instruction to do so). There are always two Counsellors functioning at one time. The Counsellors of State are the monarch's spouse and the first four adults in the line of succession. Right now, that's Queen Camilla, Prince William, Prince Harry, Prince Andrew, and Princess Beatrice. It's been established that potential Counsellors who are not working royals will not be called upon to serve (i.e., Prince Harry, Prince Andrew, and Princess Beatrice). Thus, a law was recently passed to include Prince Edward and Princess Anne among the individuals who can be called on to serve. I can recall seeing a notice hanging on the gate at Buckingham Palace in 1974 indicating that the Queen Mother and Princess Margaret, by instruction of Queen Elizabeth II, had dissolved Parliament. It was signed "Elizabeth R" and "Margaret."

by Anonymousreply 64February 9, 2024 10:43 PM

I thought the Palace said Kate didn’t have cancer.

by Anonymousreply 65February 9, 2024 10:48 PM

Cheating Pa's dying of cancer. Racist sis- in -law is on indefinite medical leave. Basher Bro is drunk in public and my bank account could be £3 million richer.

A Good Day in Montecito USA.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 66February 9, 2024 10:54 PM

Was there a separate thread about what Kate has? I always just assumed that she ovarian cysts. Just a hunch. What's the consensus on DL?

by Anonymousreply 67February 10, 2024 12:25 AM

[quote] So the Queen dies and everything goes to hell. The family is crumbling the Muslims take over the city and the universities where the anti-semites breed like rabbits destroy everything with their DEI agenda.

If only the Queen were still alive! She'd kick all those libs right in the ass.

by Anonymousreply 68February 10, 2024 1:09 AM

OJ has cancer???

by Anonymousreply 69February 10, 2024 1:15 AM

^ OMG another WOG ROYAL

by Anonymousreply 70February 10, 2024 2:52 AM

[quote] ^ OMG another WOG ROYAL

Who is the other one? Edo?

by Anonymousreply 71February 10, 2024 2:54 AM

R69: Yes

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 72February 10, 2024 9:17 PM

Who cares if people like me??? I'M going to the SuperBowl! Suck it peasants!!!!

by Anonymousreply 73February 10, 2024 11:07 PM

I think I suspect I feel during the secret surgery in the December convoy that went near a hospital, they not only transplanted Kate's prostate but they took her cervix too and that's how Charles got cervical cancer. It makes sense given how lazy and wok shy Kate is.

by Anonymousreply 74February 11, 2024 5:14 AM

R74 for fucks sake enough already with your boring posts, they are not funny.

by Anonymousreply 75February 11, 2024 8:07 AM

What r75 said.

by Anonymousreply 76February 11, 2024 1:00 PM

Honeys 90% of the posts of this thread lack any virtue of any description. Kiss my ass.

by Anonymousreply 77February 11, 2024 1:25 PM

I don't see 74's post. Guess I blocked them a while ago for a reason.

I'm still thinking that the 'prostate exam' was a ruse. There is no prostate problem. He had cancer symptoms, and they made up a prostate problem that they could easily shelf should the cancer screening come out clean. When cancer was confirmed and absence from the public would be inevitable, a prostate problem didn't cut it anymore. So they came out with the next least revealing statement that was needed to explain future events, the absence from the public. Cannot really base it on anything; it's just a hunch. And then there are of course the missing standard statements, like "good prognosis for full recovery". If there was a silver lining, they would at least hint at it.

by Anonymousreply 78February 11, 2024 6:24 PM

I hate that Cruella de Markle and her mother are probably grinning maniacally in Montecito believing they "manifested" these health problems for the RF.

Cue Markle's flying monkeys to swoop in and attack me for saying this. LOL.

by Anonymousreply 79February 11, 2024 6:29 PM

How strange to live in a world where you think things are made up in situations where no making up is necessary. A very odd way to live a life.

by Anonymousreply 80February 11, 2024 7:22 PM

R74, you probably blocked me because I called you on your nonsensical bullshit. That's my only crime on DL and many people can't take it.

by Anonymousreply 81February 11, 2024 7:23 PM

At least a couple are blocked, r79.

by Anonymousreply 82February 11, 2024 8:28 PM

R75 Klan Grannies are not noted for their sense of humor.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 83February 12, 2024 12:20 AM

Maybe at some point maybe someone can explain to me what Klan Grannies are. I might be one without even knowing. It's really just a kill-all derogatory label to silence others, isn't it? Maybe it's not even important to know.

by Anonymousreply 84February 12, 2024 12:29 AM

R84, it means you don't praise Meghan. And probably have a gross income in excess of $15,000 a year. And a high school diploma.

by Anonymousreply 85February 12, 2024 2:32 AM

R84, see r79 for an example of a Klan Granny.

by Anonymousreply 86February 12, 2024 3:43 AM

Why do you Klan Grans fanatically promote your circus yet demand we not laugh at your clowns?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 87February 12, 2024 3:40 PM

FYI: a flying monkey is someone who does the dirty work of narcissist.

Cruella de Vil was mean to dogs. There are questions about Markle's treatment of her dogs and she was also mean to three-year-old Charlotte as corroborated by the Givenchy seamstress. Halfwit Harry was abusive to his polo horse (there are photos) and supposedly violent with hookers. I don't know what the cartoon character name for the male version of Cruella is but that's what Harry is.

by Anonymousreply 88February 12, 2024 4:33 PM

"Hostilities flared up last week between Prince Harry and Queen Camilla. Or rather, the Duke of Sussex apparently launched an unprovoked volley in the direction of a 75-year-old woman. In an irony that will no doubt escape this self-proclaimed feminist and Lochinvar of the New World, Harry, I hear, preferred not to be in the same room with his stepmother when he spoke to the King about his cancer diagnosis, following the most precipitous and historic mercy mission to Blighty since Lend Lease. As olive branches go, it’s a massive opportunity missed by the Prince of Petulance – though it’s likely our laidback Queen wouldn’t have minded either way. "

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 89February 12, 2024 10:27 PM

Why does Camila need to be present for Harry to talk to his father?

by Anonymousreply 90February 12, 2024 10:38 PM

R90 perhaps Harry’s father wanted a witness to the conversation, given Harry’s creative approach to the facts in the past.

Plus, she’s the wife of the King to whom she’s been married for nineteen years. Remember, Harry said that he loved Camilla to bits at that time. Another lie, presumably.

by Anonymousreply 91February 12, 2024 10:48 PM

[quote]our laidback Queen

Frequently.

by Anonymousreply 92February 13, 2024 12:45 AM

[quote] Why does Camila need to be present for Harry to talk to his father?

If Charles didn't want Camilla there, she wouldn't have been there.

I don't know what's is so hard to figure out here.

by Anonymousreply 93February 13, 2024 1:15 AM

Charles did not want to be alone with his son because his son is an untrustworthy pussy-whipped mama's boy who acts out in pissy rages. Being paid to attend events is unfitting and sad, since he and his cunt wife are mere celebrities now in the way that the Gabors were (except perhaps partly for Eva), they parasitize the family ruthlessly, because it's all they have to sell.

Camilla is the only appropriate person to be there with Charles as a completely discreet witness. And Harry insulted her gravely, and Camilla is not the type to stand down, but also is not the type to display a grudge against her husband's son. She's above it, and down to earth but still the fucking Queen of England. (No one called Elizabeth Sr. "Queen Consort.") William absolutely refuses to consider any contact with his disgusting brother, and no one - no one - wants to be anywhere near Sussex now. Charles is king and the family members know what he is due, according to the rules they all play by, for their duty and to their own benefit. Margaret's kids and grandchildren, the Kents, the Gloucesters, the Ogilvys, as well as Sussex's aunt and uncles and families, are united on the subject of the Nouveau Duke of Windsor and his maniacal American divorcee adventuress.

by Anonymousreply 94February 13, 2024 2:15 AM

Thank you, R93.

That's exactly the truth.

Given the despicable comments about Camilla, Charles wife , which have come from Charles's younger son over the past months, having Camilla at this 12 minute meeting makes complete sense.

Harry seems incapable of "reading the room" in this regard. Would Harry really be so blind and have actually have expected that Camilla would be excluded from this meeting with his father because Harry insisted it be so? Really?

There are none so blind as those who cannot see.

by Anonymousreply 95February 13, 2024 2:27 AM

The duration of this now notorious meeting is assessed as shorter by the day. 45, 30, 20, 12 minutes. And thus ever more provocative to the volatile Harry. He'll be longing to 'put the record straight', and might just be foolish enough to do so.

by Anonymousreply 96February 13, 2024 7:54 AM

The closeness between Charles and Camilla is easily seen in photographs and videos of them together. Can anyone remember seeing the same between Charles and Diana? I can't.

Harry appears to be obsessed with his mother and it may be likely that he is just not able to set aside those feeling in the short time he had with his ill father in that meeting. His father, who, from what I've read, had just had the first round of treatment for his cancer and was probably eager to be on his way to Norfolk. But Charles's plans were spiked and delayed because Harry took it upon himself to show up in London. Camilla would have known this and would have been eager for them to be on their way so that Charles could recover from the treatment in peace. Rather than deal with Charles's troublesome second born.

Harry might well have had instructions from his wife too as to what information to pry out of his father and/or perhaps hit up the "Bank of Charles" for money, as he tried to do in the Queen's last days.

by Anonymousreply 97February 13, 2024 1:13 PM

It has been pointed out that Charles treatment was immediate. Where the normal British citizen with the NHS can wait a long time. I'm sure Charles and Camilla don't give a fuck. It's the point of royalty.

by Anonymousreply 98February 13, 2024 1:17 PM

[quote]the Nouveau Duke of Windsor and his maniacal American divorcee adventuress.

To be fair to the Duchess of Windsor, she was only a very limited adventuress, in that she wanted to social climb by sleeping with the future King, but she never intended to marry him and absolutely didn't want to be the centre of that scandal. She was quite happy married to Ernest Simpson, and wrote him affectionate letters all her life. Meghan, on the other hand, appears to have intended to use Harry as a stepping-stone to William, which is hilarious and sad all at once.

R98, "the normal British citizen with the NHS" doesn't have to pay for medical treatment. Everyone among the aristocratic classes will be using private health care, paying big bucks, and won't have to wait. Besides, NHS patients who need urgent cancer treatment (or any other kind of really urgent treatment) DO still get it. The seriousness of cancers varies depending on when they were caught and how aggressive they are.

by Anonymousreply 99February 13, 2024 1:55 PM

[quote]Where the normal British citizen with the NHS can wait a long time.

Many Brits have private insurance through work, so it's not special treatment just for them. If you're ready to pay out of pocket, front of the line. Like the U.S. Generally, the public systems triage... after a serious diagnosis you move quickly. I'm not sure what the NHS cancer rates are like. I'm not going to argue it's one of the better public systems, I think it's likely it is not. But the general principle will hold: whatever fast looks like, it will be provided for the most seriously ill.

by Anonymousreply 100February 13, 2024 1:59 PM

The longest duration mentioned - 45 minutes - is still quite obviously a snub when the person in question traveled from California to London to see you. Charles couldn't have been more clear what he thought of the sincerity of that mad dash, whether it was 12 minutes or 45.

by Anonymousreply 101February 13, 2024 2:04 PM

Claws out from Camilla Tominey:

As we learn later, the wholesome mother-of-two went to an all-girls Catholic school “which she continues to support as an alumna”.

Oh, to be in on one of Meghan’s guest assemblies: “Kidnapped by the monarchy: How I spent a summer at Sir Elton John’s Nice mansion without access to my passport.”

Harry once accused William and Charles of being “trapped” in the monarchy but as sovereign and heir to the throne, that’s surely an occupational hazard. What’s Harry and Meghan’s excuse?

There is absolutely no reason for these non-working royals to carry on using their titles – not least with an entire website dedicated to telling the world that they are much, much more than mere royalty.

She is also apparently a “major advocate” for “family care”, which may come as a surprise to her estranged father and the rest of the Markle family she doesn’t appear to have cared much about in years.

Meghan’s description as “one of the most influential women in the world” is rather more lofty. The evidence for this claim appears to be that the author of the children’s picture book, The Bench, featured in Time magazine’s most influential people, the Financial Times’ 25 most influential women, Variety Power of Women, and British Vogue’s Vogue 25 - although not, curiously, the final issue by outgoing editor Edward Enninful, published last week, featuring 40 female “legends”. Ouch. The summary goes to great lengths (588 words to Harry’s 340) to remind everyone that she is a great deal more than just his wife.

Meghan’s podcast Archetypes is mentioned in its capacity as being Number One in 47 countries – not as a one-hit wonder that was axed after one season. Unsurprisingly, the word “grifter” which was used to describe the pair by Spotify mogul Bill Simmons doesn’t feature on the website at all.

Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of the rebrand, however, is the tag line on the “Archewell Foundation” page: “Show up, Do good”. While an admirable rallying cry to the masses, visitors to sussex.com could arguably be forgiven for wondering when exactly, apart from the commendable Invictus Games, Harry and Meghan have shown up and done good since leaving the Royal family.

Meghan cites Smart Works, which supports women to enter the workforce and the Hubb Community Kitchen at Grenfell – but like Invictus, both initiatives happened when she was in “The Firm”.

Since “Megxit”, what have they done? They’ve shown up and done Oprah; shown up and done Netflix; shown up and gone Spare; shown up and sued The Sun, the Daily Mail and The Mirror.

They’ve shown up at awards ceremonies (but only the ones in which they are recipients) and shown up in “near catastrophic” car chases that the police say never actually happened.

They’ve shown up and self-promoted; shown up and complained about invasion of privacy, while invading their relatives’ privacy.

As a result of their behaviour, they’ve been shown up on South Park and Family Guy.

But with their popularity having tanked both here and in the US, none of it seems to have done them much good, let alone anyone else. It is a shame because these two actually do have the power to make a difference, if only they could get over themselves.

The perception of Harry and Meghan as a couple who do more harm than good has got to change if this rebrand is going to live up to its magisterial pretensions.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 102February 13, 2024 2:21 PM

Camilla probably insisted on being there so Charles the marshmallow didn't waver in the grey rocking of the prodigal son.

by Anonymousreply 103February 13, 2024 3:55 PM

[quote]They’ve shown up and...sued The Sun, the Daily Mail and The Mirror.

So not all bad, then.

by Anonymousreply 104February 13, 2024 4:02 PM

Wow. The world is SO close to a Millennial King and Queen. For once, they'll get something over the Boomers with Charles having a very short reign and millennials a LOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG one.

by Anonymousreply 105February 13, 2024 10:30 PM

^ Getting a little ahead of ourselves here, aren't we? At this point the man is still very alive and getting treatment with the rest being HIGHLY speculative. You are not getting his stuff just yet.

by Anonymousreply 106February 13, 2024 10:56 PM

Please, R106, last week these crepers were planning Kate's funeral.

by Anonymousreply 107February 13, 2024 11:39 PM

R106 King Charles is 75 and has cancer. He is not long for this world and the Baby Boomers' royal reign will be mercifully short, which is probably the first bit of bad luck they'd had in awhile.

by Anonymousreply 108February 14, 2024 12:49 AM

How is he holding up?

by Anonymousreply 109February 15, 2024 1:11 AM

Where is the King?

by Anonymousreply 110February 15, 2024 1:15 AM

Waiting to be euthanized at Sandringam...

by Anonymousreply 111February 15, 2024 5:15 AM

A Sunday church-walk and wave is the current public benchmark of The King's health. Any change in this weekly visual update will of course provoke widespread speculation.

by Anonymousreply 112February 15, 2024 7:12 AM

The Queen, accompanied by members of the royal family, will attend a thanksgiving service for the life of King Constantine of the Hellenes at St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle, on 27th February.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 113February 27, 2024 6:38 AM

William will be king of the United Kingdom, r105, not of the world.

by Anonymousreply 114February 27, 2024 6:40 AM

The Baby Boomers are going to have one of the shortest reigns in British Monarch history!

THANK YOU, QEII!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 115February 27, 2024 6:47 AM

Didn't see any church-walk and wave pictures from this Sunday. As though in compensation, and variation, there was the short clip of The King greeting the PM before their weekly audience.

by Anonymousreply 116February 27, 2024 6:51 AM

William will be lucky to be the King of England and Wales.

by Anonymousreply 117February 27, 2024 7:00 AM

SNP official policy is to retain the monarchy, r117.

by Anonymousreply 118February 27, 2024 9:08 AM

Charles reading some of the get-well-soon cards he received following his prognosis

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 119February 27, 2024 9:17 AM

William and Kate should just poison him already and take what's theirs.

by Anonymousreply 120February 27, 2024 9:24 AM

Oh dear, what now?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 121February 27, 2024 10:21 AM

William has pulled out of his godfather's memorial service over a "personal matter", although Kate is apparently fine.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 122February 27, 2024 10:22 AM

[quote] Was there a separate thread about what Kate has? I always just assumed that she ovarian cysts. Just a hunch. What's the consensus on DL?

Sounds like a good guess - but two weeks seems a long time in hospital for that.

by Anonymousreply 123February 27, 2024 10:29 AM

King Constantine of the Hellenes was not my King!

by Anonymousreply 124February 27, 2024 10:53 AM

[quote]William and Kate should just poison him already and take what's theirs.

Vladimir Putin is currently such a hot influencer.

by Anonymousreply 125February 27, 2024 11:24 AM

I think Kate is far from "fine."

The service would not even have involved travel. Camilla is standing in for him and her husband has cancer.

I think Kate is far more ill than they have acknowledged.

by Anonymousreply 126February 27, 2024 1:28 PM

Either that or Louis has set fire to the house.

by Anonymousreply 127February 27, 2024 1:34 PM

He was out at the BAFTAs, etc., so, something has changed.

by Anonymousreply 128February 27, 2024 1:36 PM

His diagnosis, R119. The prognosis is whether you're going to be fine, or else how long you've probably got. We don't know what Charles's prognosis is.

by Anonymousreply 129February 27, 2024 1:38 PM

The continued lack of leaks on Kate’s real condition is pretty amazing.

by Anonymousreply 130February 27, 2024 1:43 PM

It also speaks to its seriousness. My guess is very few people even inside KP know what her ailment and progress are, and they have been told, We're serious about this one: you say one word and you're dead to us.

by Anonymousreply 131February 27, 2024 1:46 PM

The service is right at Windsor, not far away. That he pulled out of it at the last minute seems quite concerning.

by Anonymousreply 132February 27, 2024 1:50 PM

R130 It truly is. Makes me wonder if they offered Harry and Meg some kind of quid pro quo for their discretion. Or else that was the reason for limiting his strictly guarded time in any of the royal properties (and amongst the company of any potentially loose-lipped courtiers).

by Anonymousreply 133February 27, 2024 1:50 PM

Wouldn't matter what was offered to the Putrid Pair. Haz and Megdusa would blab anything they knew for attention and money.

by Anonymousreply 134February 27, 2024 1:56 PM

It can't be Charles-related, or Camilla would have pulled out as well.

by Anonymousreply 135February 27, 2024 1:58 PM

I hope she will be ok, the kids are so little.

by Anonymousreply 136February 27, 2024 2:05 PM

[quote]It also speaks to its seriousness.

Easter was the notional aim for some sort of resumption. That's another four weeks and more of recovery. Silence will likely endure. There must be a total press embargo on discussing the matter, and people meeting William briefed not to ask. Serious indeed.

by Anonymousreply 137February 27, 2024 2:07 PM

Reddit says he pulled out because Pedo Uncle was going to be there.

by Anonymousreply 138February 27, 2024 2:22 PM

I hope that’s the case.

by Anonymousreply 139February 27, 2024 2:34 PM

So William is going to avoid his uncle even to the point of disrespecting the Hellenes? That’s going to be difficult to orchestrate.

by Anonymousreply 140February 27, 2024 2:39 PM

Queen Camilla Joined by Royals at Thanksgiving Service For King Constantine.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 141February 27, 2024 2:46 PM

That seems implausible as a reason to not attend. I think Kate's health is worse than disclosed or has taken a turn.

by Anonymousreply 142February 27, 2024 3:06 PM

It's nice that that Fergie was there. And Camilla has really been stepping up. I also love the detail of the ermine-bordered, royal-but-not-the-sovereign standard on the state Bentley.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 143February 27, 2024 3:17 PM

Someone on Twitter observed that Kate made an appearance hours after shitting out a baby, looking like a supermodel. She hasn't been seen in weeks. Something is really bad.

by Anonymousreply 144February 27, 2024 3:35 PM

Fergie is back in the mix, honey.

by Anonymousreply 145February 27, 2024 3:37 PM

It does seem odd that they haven't released even one photo of a smiling Kate in bed in her PJs (wearing full make-up, of course), captioned with a message of thanks for her well-wishers.

by Anonymousreply 146February 27, 2024 3:37 PM

[quote]King Constantine of the Hellenes

Funny how Charles slimmed down the monarchy to an extreme anorexic tap root, yet reminds the world how royal the royals are.

When is the memorial service for Christian IX of Denmark?

by Anonymousreply 147February 27, 2024 5:02 PM

Story is BS. They don’t celebrate Thanksgiving in UK

by Anonymousreply 148February 27, 2024 5:13 PM

I hope you're joking, R148.

by Anonymousreply 149February 27, 2024 5:42 PM

Lady Gabriella Windsor's husband has been found dead at 45. There's speculation that William pulled out of the event to comfort her, but given that they're distant cousins, this seems unlikely.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 150February 27, 2024 6:01 PM

“So the rumors are Charles has bladder cancer and Kate has ovarian cancer?” — Jesus, what’s in the water over there?

It’s true that I’m an American Camilla-hater (she’s SUCH a gauche, ugly cow) but I’m amused by the enduringly vicious Harry-and-Meghan hate. He was the spare anyway, and was depicted as a dim clown all his life, his wife scorned as a social-climbing mulatta — though Katie’s successful attempt at upward mobility through marriage is evidently okay. Is Harry hen-pecked? Does Meghan wear the pants in the family? Maybe, and who cares? That’s not unknown in history or in royal and unroyal circles.

So they throw in the towel and move to America and are treated even worse in the UK. Like it or not, Charles is still Harry’s father and he has a right to see him and try to maintain some contact with him, despite the many royals and their sycophants who are arrayed against him. H-and-M have effectively been sidelined, so let all the hate go you’ll feel better.

And none of the Harry haters have seriously challenged his accusations about the unholy alliance between the press and the royals, and the way royal intermediaries use it to manipulate those members of The Firm who are out of favor. That he took umbrage at that (as one of its prime victims) and fought back is not something this non-Royalist American holds against him.

by Anonymousreply 151February 27, 2024 6:02 PM

Did someone curse the BRF at the beginning of the year?

by Anonymousreply 152February 27, 2024 6:16 PM

Sorry, R151, I despise Prince Dimbulb and his cunty wife, and am very comfortable in viewing them as worthless manipulative parasites. Please don't worry about how I "feel."

by Anonymousreply 153February 27, 2024 6:18 PM

R129 I stand corrected!

by Anonymousreply 154February 27, 2024 6:19 PM

I’m not worried, R153, just scornful.

by Anonymousreply 155February 27, 2024 6:21 PM

I'm checking back in on this thread as I haven't heard exactly WHAT type of cancer King Charles has. Does anyone know yet? I've only skimmed (and not very thoroughly) what has been posted since last I checked and didn't see it.

Anyone?

And I'm surmising from the skimming that I did we also (still) don't know what Kate Middleton was hospitalized for/recovering from.

I can't believe NO ONE has the scoop on either of these.

by Anonymousreply 156February 27, 2024 6:22 PM

Absolutely not, R152. That's ridiculous. Where would you get such an idea?

by Anonymousreply 157February 27, 2024 6:23 PM

I don't understand the PR strategy here at all. Charles discloses his prostate treatment, but not the type of cancer. If you do one, why not the other?

They don't close Kate's condition because, I think, they want to avoid a paparazzi death watch outside her hospital.

by Anonymousreply 158February 27, 2024 6:29 PM

Gee, R151, remind us when Kate branded herself as a feminist, complained about performing her royal duties without "pay," made up being suicidal, mocked the queen, and spread vicious lies about her in-laws. We'll wait.

by Anonymousreply 159February 27, 2024 6:35 PM

When will the royal curse set its sights on the most deserving target of all?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 160February 27, 2024 6:40 PM

The Royals have had a horror run over the last few years.

by Anonymousreply 161February 27, 2024 6:43 PM

I think the tie pin that Andrew is wearing with the George VI cypher in R160 is the same one that Charles was wearing during his accession privy council. People were saying that Charles had it made ahead of time lol.

by Anonymousreply 162February 27, 2024 6:44 PM

[quote]Charles discloses his prostate treatment, but not the type of cancer. If you do one, why not the other?

I guess because he wants to avoid the explosion of medical information, opinion and advice which would follow any such announcement. The statistics, the timeline, the treatments, the prognosis. The public noise about his condition and treatment wouldn't be helpful. Whichever part of his anatomy is afflicted would be in the news every day. Privacy makes sense.

by Anonymousreply 163February 27, 2024 6:44 PM

Word is Chuck has the pancreatic cancer.

by Anonymousreply 164February 27, 2024 6:45 PM

That is not typically a good prognosis, R164.

What are the current thoughts re: Catherine?

by Anonymousreply 165February 27, 2024 6:51 PM

R164 whose word is that?

by Anonymousreply 166February 27, 2024 6:54 PM

R159: How much of that laundry list is even true?

And just for the sake of argument —let’s assume it’s all true — they’re stateside now and out of your hair, apart from the occasional Harry fly-by, so why worry your pretty head about them?

by Anonymousreply 167February 27, 2024 6:55 PM

Ten years ago, we saw Queen Elizabeth as the face of the Royal Family. Now we have, Queen Camilla. Quite the change.

by Anonymousreply 168February 27, 2024 7:13 PM

r168, Old Smokey Puss...

by Anonymousreply 169February 27, 2024 7:42 PM

If Catherine dies, then that sapphire and diamond encrusted wedding ring she wears which used to belong to Diana is positively, absolutely CURSED!

by Anonymousreply 170February 27, 2024 7:58 PM

r151 You think Harry and Meghan never gave the press the same off the record briefings?? Don't be naive Harry didn't throw the towel in they both asked for half in half out. I know that fact interferes with the Disney fairytale narrative of their life their life that they are trying to push but its a fact. Alas an inconvenient one. They never threw the towel in given they neither gave up their titles or renounced their place in the line of succession. They wanted all the glamorous bits to monetise their association and none of the hard boring work and had a massive tantrum and changed their story when denied. People who have thrown in the towel on royal life don't ask judges to address them by royal titles and don't introduce themselves to senators as the Duchess of Sussex.

by Anonymousreply 171February 27, 2024 7:59 PM

Re: Kate- I hope to God she doesn't have Ovarian CA, because it is notoriously difficult to treat and even when a patient is "cured" of it, the Cancer comes back for a last and lethal time.

by Anonymousreply 172February 27, 2024 7:59 PM

r170, Wills should return it to Harry.

by Anonymousreply 173February 27, 2024 8:00 PM

I'm starting to get Shelly Miscavige vibes with Catherine. She literally has not been seen since Dec. 25th. Not a wave from a car, not a quick video update from bed, not even a photo. That's a full two months where the future queen of England has just completely dropped off the map. She could be in a coma for all anyone knows.

by Anonymousreply 174February 27, 2024 8:07 PM

[quote]R152 Did someone curse the BRF at the beginning of the year?

What goes around, comes around.

by Anonymousreply 175February 27, 2024 8:12 PM

R171, My larger point here is that you don’t seem able to let them go, or let go of your loathing. Here in the US they are simply celebrity names like scores of others, we can choose to read about them or not. To some of you here on Datalounge they are like a corrosive acid slow-dripping into open wounds.

Just get over them, already. “The Firm” suddenly has much bigger problems than Harry-n-Meghan or whether “The Crown” was accurate or not.

by Anonymousreply 176February 27, 2024 8:17 PM

Camilla is the equivalent of Philip, r168, not of Elizabeth. Charles is the equivalent of Elizabeth.

by Anonymousreply 177February 27, 2024 8:40 PM

I realise this is hard for you to understand, r174, but it's not necessary for public figures to be popping up every week or so, giving us updates from bed, or posting a selfie of their current mood. Unless Catherine is at a public event of some kind, there's no reason for us to see her.

by Anonymousreply 178February 27, 2024 8:45 PM

She is not “the future Queen of England”, R175.

by Anonymousreply 179February 27, 2024 9:01 PM

R176 I don't want to let go of my loathing for loathesome people. Move on bitch.

by Anonymousreply 180February 27, 2024 9:32 PM

[QUOTE][R170], Wills should return it to Harry

When did it belong to Harry o that necessitates a "return?"

In that case, then, Harry should cough up Diana's Cartier watch for William. I've read the brothers had an agreement: the one who married first got the ring, the other got the watch. But that would require prying it from Meghan's cold, dead hands.

by Anonymousreply 181February 27, 2024 9:33 PM

We’ll happily get over the Putrid Pair as soon as they stop putting themselves in the media. You know , like buying awards, making up deadly car chases, and being papped in a parking lot.

by Anonymousreply 182February 27, 2024 9:37 PM

Harry's little intern spotted.

by Anonymousreply 183February 27, 2024 9:43 PM

Imagine the speculation if either of them disclosed exactly what's wrong with them. As a matter of privacy and dignity, they didn't, and based on the macabre idiocy on the internet it seems a wise decision in both cases. In fact it was inadvertent kindness to many ghouls. Not knowing doesn't confine their morbid fantasies.

by Anonymousreply 184February 27, 2024 9:45 PM

r181, I am positive that the DoS knows the value of the ring and would gladly revert the swap under Diana's original wishes.

But only if Catherine dies before becoming queen.

by Anonymousreply 185February 27, 2024 9:57 PM

Can you imagine Meghan trying to auction the ring under the guise of raising money for 'good causes?'

by Anonymousreply 186February 27, 2024 10:21 PM

Is it really true that William gave Catherine the same engagement ring Charles gave Diana? Why on earth would anyone want to repurpose a ring that symbolized one of the most famously loveless, toxic marriages in recent history? Creepy as hell...

by Anonymousreply 187February 27, 2024 11:35 PM

Harry inherited the sapphire ring, but gave it (?) to William. Kate now has the ring.

Somehow, I remember seeing a photo of Meghan wearing a sapphire ring, too, though.

by Anonymousreply 188February 27, 2024 11:40 PM

So - is Charles forced to step down because of cancer? God, he schemed and winged his whole life to take the throne and now, just over a year later - -

by Anonymousreply 189February 28, 2024 1:04 AM

So, R189.

by Anonymousreply 190February 28, 2024 2:20 AM

I'm really worried about Catherine now.

Unless she's on her deathbed, how can William not slip away for an hour or two? I don't get it.

Maybe she took a turn for the worse and he had to stay to see what's happening? May or may not be very serious but if it just happened, he couldn't be sure??

I really can't think of anything else - unless there's something wrong with him.

by Anonymousreply 191February 28, 2024 5:12 AM

Perhaps her Ladyship Rosebush Chumley was in attendance and Kate got pouty about them being together outside of her watchful eye.

by Anonymousreply 192February 28, 2024 5:28 AM

Might it have been in attendance to his father, the King, to travel to (or stay,as the case may be) at their respective Sandringham estates? His father's health still remains unknown save for Charles opening well-wishers' cards, as Dutchie posted prior.

by Anonymousreply 193February 28, 2024 5:49 AM

[quote]Harry inherited the sapphire ring, but gave it (?) to William. Kate now has the ring.

Harry inherited the ring; William inherited the beloved Cartier watch. They swapped them when William wanted to propose to Kate (at that point, Harry did not have a clear prospect of getting engaged soon). Harry ultimately gave the Cartier watch to Meghan, who regularly wears it.

[quote]Somehow, I remember seeing a photo of Meghan wearing a sapphire ring, too, though.

Meghan's engagement ring is a clear colorless diamond Harry chose for her.

by Anonymousreply 194February 28, 2024 5:58 AM

R193 I was watching some British news snippets about all this, and apparently Charles met with the family of King Contantine or whatever his name was, before the service but he didn't stay because he's not supposed to be around large groups of people.

And this 45 year old cousin of William's who just died, Thomas Kingston - another news clip said he was a good friend of William's and he had dated Pippa Middleton.

Oh and one commentator, just a youtuber I think, suggested he might have Covid, but I think they'd just announce it, if so.

Curiouser and curiouser.

by Anonymousreply 195February 28, 2024 8:47 AM

There’s no doubt Will is dealing with at least some stress. Probably a lot. And I forgot he might’ve been worried about the fallout Gaza message (and Gaza itself if he cares) for the last few days. Aside from all the impersonal humor, and considering his expected role, I do honestly hope he’s alright.

by Anonymousreply 196February 28, 2024 9:18 AM

The very same KGT who loves to label Markle's detractors as Klan Grannies, and who bemoaned her first mention in this thread as coming from a KG, posted this in the SNAP! thread:

Exactly why Asian store owners dislike Black customers and distrust them.

by Anonymousreply 197February 28, 2024 11:19 AM

If William turns out to be ill as well, I think we really should look more closely at Charlotte's alibis.

by Anonymousreply 198February 28, 2024 11:52 AM

Haha. He's not ill, Catherine did not turn for the worse, and the children are unhurt.

by Anonymousreply 199February 28, 2024 1:28 PM

R189 is very confused.

by Anonymousreply 200February 28, 2024 1:31 PM

Maybe William didn't like the old coot of Greece and didn't want to attend his memorial. Who cares? It was a private service and not part of Wm's public duty.

by Anonymousreply 201February 29, 2024 2:56 AM

R201, as others mentioned here…it was his godfather.

by Anonymousreply 202February 29, 2024 2:58 AM

But his name was already on the program or plan of service or whatever they call the things. If he just didn't want to attend, I don't think he'd leave it to the last minute to let them know.

Sudden emergency with sick wife? Mental breakdown? Drug overdose? Hangover?

This family is falling apart, what with Charles' cancer, the comical Harkles, and now all this mystery with the Waleses. smh

by Anonymousreply 203February 29, 2024 3:11 AM

Catherine's brother and sister have both been on vacation recently. I doubt they would have left London if Catherine was in any kind of grave danger.

Why are people expecting photographic updates from Catherine? She's not tacky Chrissy Teigen blasting her miscarriage video on social media.

by Anonymousreply 204February 29, 2024 3:18 AM

[quote]R204 Why are people expecting photographic updates from Catherine? She's not tacky Chrissy Teigen blasting her miscarriage video on social media.

The lady chose to be a public figure, and The People pay her bills.

You can’t be half in, half out.

by Anonymousreply 205February 29, 2024 3:26 AM

It just seems so unusual. I can hardly think of any conditions that require two weeks in hospital post surgery.

And William suddenly ducked out of something important.

So of course you wonder what it could possibly be. It's like an Agatha Christie mystery, kind of. Especially being in a year when our interest is piqued by the scandals involving Harry, Meghan, and Andrew.

by Anonymousreply 206February 29, 2024 3:40 AM

[QUOTE]This family is falling apart, what with Charles' cancer, the comical Harkles, and now all this mystery with the Waleses. smh

And... Tell us more

by Anonymousreply 207February 29, 2024 4:56 AM

To be fair, R202, "Godfather" and "Godmother" are pretty much meaningless in royal circles. Queen Margrethe is the godmother of King Willem-Alexander, but I doubt she would have jumped had anything happened to his mother, Beatrix, when he was still a child.

by Anonymousreply 208February 29, 2024 8:03 AM

I don't understand why all of a sudden everyone is up in arms about Catherine's absence. KP's statement early on clearly stated she would return to duties after Easter. It's not Easter yet, so why the drama? Once Easter has come and gone, if she hasn't made an appearance, then I'd say it's right to start speculating, but until then, everything is going as previously announced by KP.

by Anonymousreply 209February 29, 2024 8:56 AM

Lol r205, you have no fucking clue. The public don't pay her bills. Moreover, being a public figure means playing a certain role. It does not mean posting selfies on Instagram or popping up in the tabloids just to be seen. Kate's role is that of a working royal, which means she engages in certain public events and activities. If she has a health issue which means she isn't going to be in the limelight for a few months, then so what? I can assure you, there is no clamour in the UK for a selfie from her just becoz we want our money's worth!

by Anonymousreply 210February 29, 2024 9:20 AM

R208, William has six godparents, including Constantine. Constantine had nine godchildren.

Sure, William was scheduled to appear at the memorial service but he didn't. It's ok, we don't have to know every last detail of their lives.

by Anonymousreply 211February 29, 2024 9:22 AM

Exactly, r209, r210 and r211.

William gave a very good explanation in an interview years ago regarding how once the door to someone's private life has been opened, it cannot be closed again. Basically, drawing a line and keeping to it is better than attempting to manipulate the press and public by allowing them into the inner sanctum on some occasions, and whining about privacy on others. Along with Diana, Paula Yates also suffered from thinking the press and public's appetites could be teased and taunted. That both women were considered to have Borderline personalities says a lot.

He obviously learned something worthwhile from his mother's existence, and his brother should have listened to him, instead of marrying a famewhore who would visit the graves of massacre victims to get her photo taken.

by Anonymousreply 212February 29, 2024 10:54 AM

[quote] This family is falling apart, what with Charles' cancer, the comical Harkles, and now all this mystery with the Waleses. smh

It’s called “opportunity.”

by Anonymousreply 213February 29, 2024 2:25 PM

The public certainly does pay quite a lot of their bills.

by Anonymousreply 214February 29, 2024 2:27 PM

Edit for my R208 comment:

[quote] but I doubt she would have jumped **IN** had anything happened to his mother

by Anonymousreply 215February 29, 2024 2:59 PM

Actually, the public doesn't pay their bills. If the cost of the monarchy was paid for from general funds, which derive from income tax, then the public would pay their bills. The cost of monarchy is funded variously by agreements governing the proceeds from The Crown Estate and the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, all which existed centuries before the public ever started paying income tax. The annual expenditure of monarchy will amount to 126 million pounds next year, about a third of which is directed to the repairs and restoration of Buckingham Palace, HQ for the monarchy, and neglected for the better part of seventy years. By comparison, the NHS gets 181 billion pounds from general funds. The military costs about 70 billion. Foreign aid spending totals 11 billion.

by Anonymousreply 216February 29, 2024 3:16 PM

The crown estates are public property. The status of the Royal Duchies is probably more complicated.

by Anonymousreply 217February 29, 2024 3:43 PM

Does The Crown Estate belong to the King?

No. The Crown Estate is not the private property of the King. Our assets are hereditary possessions of the Sovereign held ‘in right of the Crown’. This means they belong to the Sovereign for the duration of their reign, but cannot be sold by them, nor do revenues from the assets belong to them.

The UK government does not own The Crown Estate either.

Established by an Act of Parliament in 1961 (see next answer) we are an independent, commercial business, managed by a Board (also known as The Crown Estate Commissioners).

This independence is critical to enable us to fulfil our core duties, act commercially and deliver our strategy to create environmental, social and financial value both now and for the long term.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 218February 29, 2024 4:03 PM

[quote]Actually, the public doesn't pay their bills.

So why was Harry denied police protection and suing for it? Doesn’t the public pay indirectly (ie police protection)?

by Anonymousreply 219February 29, 2024 6:38 PM

I think the royal family is entering a backlash phase. A couple of stories/columns in the Mail complaining about Prince Andrew at the head of the line at King Constantine's memorial, the King's discretion about exactly what kind of cancer he his being treated for, but more they're not happy with Prince William's "secrecy": about his wife's illness, about his sudden bolt from the service yesterday. If it seeps into the real newspapers, they're going to have to make a change.

by Anonymousreply 220February 29, 2024 7:39 PM

Protection is paid for by government - for all kinds of people in public life. So the protection for the royal family is paid for from public finds. As protection for the President's family and Vice-President's family, etc., is paid for in the U.S. As protection would be paid for if the UK had a different model of head of state.

by Anonymousreply 221February 29, 2024 7:41 PM

Harry wasn't "denied" police protection, r219 - he's simply not eligible for it. Only royals who perform public duties are given police protection. Yes, the public pays for that as taxpayers, but the public pays for the security of all public officials, who perform public duties The public pays for the police protection of politicians, for example. Moreover, the royal family do not get salaries or stipends for their personal expenditures. What Harry wanted was for police protection paid for by the taxpayer whenever he decided to come on holiday to the UK. Harry then lied and claimed he had always offered to pay for police protection himself, but the police are not for hire by private citizens in that way.

by Anonymousreply 222February 29, 2024 7:46 PM

Hah! I love the card Charles chose to hold up at r119.

by Anonymousreply 223February 29, 2024 8:48 PM

Tbere is no backlash, except for tabloids and internet assholes looking for clicks. Also, I see the Sussex Karens moaning about the "secrecy." OMG CRISIS!!! CRIIIIIISIS!!! Fuck off, phonies.

by Anonymousreply 224February 29, 2024 9:54 PM

I think the term police protection is confusing. What Harry wants is our equivalent of secret service protection.

by Anonymousreply 225February 29, 2024 10:12 PM

Right. He wants his goons to carry guns and get direct ongoing UK intelligence. He moaned because there were actual members of the public within his range while taking the train. The absolute horror of it all.

by Anonymousreply 226March 1, 2024 11:35 AM

A friend in the media heard from colleagues that it's bladder cancer. They seem to think it's "pretty bad."

by Anonymousreply 227March 1, 2024 11:45 AM

Sure, sure. The "media" connection makes me believe you..

by Anonymousreply 228March 1, 2024 11:49 AM

When Charles dies, do you think Camilla will hide the fact so she can continue to be Queen Consort?

“Oh, William, your father just took his medication and he’s sleeping. Come back tomorrow.”

by Anonymousreply 229March 1, 2024 12:21 PM

[quote]Protection is paid for by government

And they better be on fucking time.

by Anonymousreply 230March 1, 2024 12:25 PM

[quote]Sure, sure. The "media" connection makes me believe you..

I'm certainly not going to reveal my friend's name and employer on this vile pit of trollery. I think most posters here would agree that would be a terrible idea.

I understand why you don't believe me. I was just passing along what I heard, it's my duty as a Datalounger.

by Anonymousreply 231March 1, 2024 12:30 PM

R227, it's a logical explanation. They are more likely to have found bladder cancer during a prostate operation than pancreatic cancer. It is also likely to have been masked by typical prostate symptoms.

How bad it is will depend on how aggressive the particular form he has is, how well it responds to chemo and whether it had already spread to other organs.

by Anonymousreply 232March 1, 2024 1:17 PM

I know people who have survived bladder cancer and some, younger, who did not. I wish him well.

No gossip about what ails Catherine?

by Anonymousreply 233March 1, 2024 2:24 PM

[quote] No gossip about what ails Catherine?

Tell us you haven't read this or the first thread without telling us you haven't read this or the first thread.

by Anonymousreply 234March 1, 2024 2:57 PM

I was watching on of the royal reporting youtube shows - maybe Palace Confidential - but anyway, they said that preparations had started for the king's death and transition to the new king.

They pointed out that these same preparations started many years for Elizabeth before she actually died (and every year they had a "rehearsal" for her death - egads, imagine being her)

by Anonymousreply 235March 1, 2024 5:54 PM

Preparations for all sorts of public figures' deaths are underway all the time, r235, irrespective of age or health. Rishi Sunak is only 43 and looks to be in very good health, but no doubt there are preparations underway and an established protocol in the case of his death.

by Anonymousreply 236March 1, 2024 6:03 PM

What Bridge is William?

Charles is Menai Bridge.

Does Her Majesty Smokey Puss have a Bridge?

by Anonymousreply 237March 1, 2024 6:05 PM

R225 What Harry really wants his internationally protected person restored so that regardless of what country he is in, he and Meghan will have access to state funded security. That's what this has always been about. There have been reports that their annual security bill is $2 to $3 million a year.

by Anonymousreply 238March 1, 2024 6:21 PM

R235 There were a couple reports about this in a couple of the UK papers last week I think. Basically it seems like the King's cancer promoted a pragmatic realization that despite Charles' parents longevity, he is in his 70s and plans should be put in place sooner rather than later. It's likely Charles' funeral will be a more low key funeral compared to Queen Elizabeth II's and previous monarchs but will still involve lying in state and likely a funeral at Westminster Abbey.

by Anonymousreply 239March 1, 2024 6:27 PM

[quote]Charles is Menai Bridge.

Fascinating in a recent BBC documentary when The Archbishop related that he was going about paperwork one morning, when he picked up the phone to hear the phrase, 'London Bridge.' In other words, you have your work cut out now Your Grace, because the longest reign has drawn to its close.

by Anonymousreply 240March 1, 2024 6:40 PM

[quote]R227 It’s bladder cancer. They seem to think it's "pretty bad." — poor Charlie. Seriously.

Eh. He’s a cold, selfish nepo baby. There are more worthwhile people in distress to worry about.

by Anonymousreply 241March 1, 2024 7:05 PM

[quote]R231 It's likely Charles' funeral will be a more low key funeral compared to Queen Elizabeth II's

Well, I’d hope so. He’s been King Tampon all of, what… a year?

by Anonymousreply 242March 1, 2024 7:08 PM

[quote]No gossip about what ails Catherine?

Sorry, but I wouldn't post it here if I knew it because there are a few completely unhinged sorts who love wishing the worst on Kate.

by Anonymousreply 243March 1, 2024 7:13 PM

Gosh, R242 - the tampon joke is so cutting edge and funneee!

by Anonymousreply 244March 1, 2024 7:40 PM

I don’t think you can really criticize the monarch for being a nepo baby. They can't all be William the Conqueror.

by Anonymousreply 245March 1, 2024 7:46 PM

[quote]R244 Gosh, the tampon joke is so cutting edge and funneee!

Oh, like dangling tendrils?

by Anonymousreply 246March 1, 2024 7:56 PM

R227 Seeing a urologist annually once you reach age 60 is good practice. Usually the problem is prostate issues, but bladder condition with abnormalities or significant wall thickening can at some point become cancerous. Annual check ups can spot a problem early and usually treated.

by Anonymousreply 247March 1, 2024 7:58 PM

I haven’t seen dangling tendrils for years (the expression - she’s still rocking the Look). You must be a little behind, as you undoubtedly are in life, R246.

by Anonymousreply 248March 1, 2024 8:17 PM

I'm sure there were a couple of "reports" about it, r239, and I'm sure they were not based on any actual news developments and their intention is simply to get a reaction. As I said at r235, preparations for the potential deaths of public figures, in particular state officials, are underway all the time, regardless of their age and health. Preparations for Charles' potential death have been taking place probably since he was born. It's not as though he reached a certain age and then had a cancer diagnosis and so the government thought "oh, we'd better think about what to do in case he pops it." I've no doubt there are plans in place for even if William dies suddenly.

by Anonymousreply 249March 1, 2024 8:32 PM

[quote]I've no doubt there are plans in place for even if William dies suddenly.

William is 'Danny Collins', Kate is 'Daphne Clark.' The initials DC reflect their titles as Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

by Anonymousreply 250March 2, 2024 6:46 AM

Um, please tell me there are no preparations in train for my death?

by Anonymousreply 251March 2, 2024 10:29 AM

No official ones.

by Anonymousreply 252March 2, 2024 10:29 AM

I doubt Kate has ovarian cancer. She's about 20 years too young for it. Gilda Radner excepted, ovarian cancer, unlike breast cancer, really is an older woman's cancer.

by Anonymousreply 253March 2, 2024 11:20 AM

r245 William was the son of Robert I, Duke of Normandy, the most powerful French province at the time! A bastard, yes, but his lineage did help him get to where he eventually got.

I think a better example would be Justin the Thracian, who started out as a swineherd, took a long walk to Constantinople as a lad, and ended up becoming the emperor. Not that any of you bitches assembled here know who that is. It's likelier you'd recognise the lowly beginnings of the Empress Theodora, the whores akin to her that you are.

by Anonymousreply 254March 2, 2024 12:10 PM

lol, r252

I adore you Charlotte-as-Usurper Troll.

by Anonymousreply 255March 2, 2024 1:13 PM

R252 is a fraud. HRHs don’t refer to themselves as HRH.

by Anonymousreply 256March 2, 2024 2:05 PM

R253 my sister in law died of ovarian cancer at age 41.

by Anonymousreply 257March 2, 2024 3:57 PM

In retrospect, I think Pippa was sent on vacation to distract.

I hope the young mother of three young children is doing well and makes a full and speedy recovery.

The vultures on the duplicitous duos' payroll are despicable.

by Anonymousreply 258March 2, 2024 4:02 PM

R257, I'm so sorry.

by Anonymousreply 259March 2, 2024 4:16 PM

We should remember that Kensington Palace confirmed to the press that Kate's condition was NOT cancerous. With open abdominal surgery on average it takes 6 weeks (sometimes upwards of 8 to 12) for the incision to fully heal. It generally takes 12 weeks or more (Kate's estimated recovery time) to get about 75% of muscle control back within your abdomen. It can take months, sometimes more than a year from numbness in the region to fully abate. Kate's longer stay in hospital was probably down to the fact that she is the future Queen and will get better medical treatment than any of us plebs will ever get. Give much of her duties involve being on her feet and walking, they want to make sure she's fully recovered before she resumes any level of engagements. Whatever she had done is likely gynecological in nature.

by Anonymousreply 260March 2, 2024 9:05 PM

[quote]much of her duties involve being on her feet and walking

Don't forget accepting bouquets from random girls.

by Anonymousreply 261March 2, 2024 9:09 PM

Well, they are called walkabouts.

by Anonymousreply 262March 2, 2024 9:15 PM

It must be her annual distraction, R258, given she was there in the same window last year.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 263March 2, 2024 9:49 PM

And if you Google is in the Caribbean pretty much this time every year and has done for years.

But, yep, definitely deployed as a distraction. Well spotted, indeed.

by Anonymousreply 264March 2, 2024 9:49 PM

R256, my long-time devoted subjects will know that I only began using the HRH in my correspondence when Uncle and Aunt Whatstheirname began whining about how their children had been deprived of it. It is intended as a tiny twist of the Royal knife.

Not that I own any knives.

by Anonymousreply 265March 3, 2024 4:37 AM

I appreciate the effort, honey, but HRH is inherently a third-party reference. It makes no sense to refer to oneself as “Her Royal Highness”

It would be like Donald Trump referring to himself as Trump.

Oh, never mind.

by Anonymousreply 266March 3, 2024 4:43 AM

Or Donald Trump referring to himself as The Donald?

Right.

by Anonymousreply 267March 3, 2024 4:55 AM

R266 proving that he knows fuck all about how royal styles and titles work. It’s really not that complicated. For most people, I mean, honey.

by Anonymousreply 268March 3, 2024 5:44 AM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 269March 3, 2024 5:47 AM

And, R269?

by Anonymousreply 270March 3, 2024 7:34 AM

And @ R269, at least the fountain pen worked...

by Anonymousreply 271March 3, 2024 7:52 AM

And there was nary a sandwich tray or Dorito to be seen from the Sussex attendance and their quick, abashed in 'n out appearance and exit, film crew toting and all.

by Anonymousreply 272March 3, 2024 7:58 AM

[quote] [R266] proving that he knows fuck all about how royal styles and titles work. It’s really not that complicated. For most people, I mean, honey

So you think HRHs DO refer to themselves as HRH? You shouldn’t be presenting yourself as a font of knowledge.

by Anonymousreply 273March 3, 2024 2:07 PM

R270, the point is actual royalty don't use HRH or Prince or Princess. They just sign their given name. The sovereign signs with a R following: Charles R, Elizabeth R. George RI if you want to go back to the good old days.

by Anonymousreply 274March 3, 2024 4:49 PM

Do the teachers of the Wales children have to curtsy and bow to the kids the first time they see them each day?

What about household staff? Nannies?

Do Charles and Camilla have staff bowing and curtsying all day to them or just the first time they see them each morning? Catherine and William?

What about when the Royal family goes to the doctor or dentist? Do medical professionals have to bow and curtsy?

Inquiring American minds want to know.

by Anonymousreply 275March 3, 2024 6:39 PM

From what I've read everyone calls the children by their first names, maybe sometimes they use the Prince or Princess, but the formality kicks in after the 18th birthday.

by Anonymousreply 276March 3, 2024 6:41 PM

Poor Charles is up at Sandringham receiving "cancer treatments" until they decide to give him the needle.

by Anonymousreply 277March 3, 2024 6:41 PM

I find it foolish to wait until I'm 18.

by Anonymousreply 278March 3, 2024 6:53 PM

Yes, R325 - everybody who sees the Wales family must curtsy constantly. It gets pretty tiring but the tradition must be upheld.

by Anonymousreply 279March 3, 2024 7:48 PM

Pay no attention to the obvious and poorly educated imposter.

by Anonymousreply 280March 3, 2024 8:46 PM

Weird, r279, because they are constantly meeting people who don't curtsy or bow to them.

by Anonymousreply 281March 3, 2024 10:38 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 282March 3, 2024 10:40 PM

You’re a clever one aren’t you, R281!

by Anonymousreply 283March 3, 2024 11:02 PM

"During her time as international development secretary, Ms Mordaunt supported Eden, a not-for-profit organisation that teaches jewellery-making skills to women in southeast Asia rescued from human traffickers.

“I sent one of the necklaces to Meghan Markle. It was quite early on, at the time she was having difficulties. I wanted to demonstrate to her the opportunity she had and what she could potentially do. She had a lot of support from parliamentarians, a lot of people wrote to her and wanted to support her.”

But when asked by the publication whether Ms Markle responded to her offer, Ms Mordaunt replied, “No, she didn’t”. And, laughing, added: “But it was worth a try.”

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 284March 3, 2024 11:17 PM

I sent that ungrateful peasant a banana!

by Anonymousreply 285March 4, 2024 2:05 AM

I always loved how in “The Crown,” when any of the main royals were walking around the palace, any servants that happen to be there had to flatten themselves against the wall and duck their heads as the royals passed. That’s class (class system).

by Anonymousreply 286March 4, 2024 2:55 AM

[QUOTE]But when asked by the publication whether Ms Markle responded to her offer, Ms Mordaunt replied, “No, she didn’t”. And, laughing, added: “But it was worth a try.”

Another perfect example of Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, failing to read the room and create opportunities for herself and the women she purports to support and serve. (Remember her "Service is Universal" siren call after ERII said "No" to half-in haf-out?)

This was a Golden opportunity to help Meghan establish a toehold as a new, young unknown. But she can't tolerate associating with women of higher status or achievement. It burns her worthless butt. And she keeps diminishing herself by acting as a special, fussy "Princess" when she has absolutely nothing to share, not even solidarity with formerly trafficked and horrifically abused women. The topic alone would be enough to take the DoS

She could have forged a nice little "alliance" with Mourdant vis a vis their common interest of empowering women.

Remember, she sad "service is universal"

by Anonymousreply 287March 4, 2024 7:30 AM

That's fictional TV, r286.

It's funny how the twits who point to something they saw on The Crown to prove to us just how awful the royals apparently are don't realise just how much of a fool they're making of themselves.

by Anonymousreply 288March 4, 2024 7:31 AM

Who are the gray men?

by Anonymousreply 289March 4, 2024 7:59 AM

The anecdote at R284 shows that Meghan is less charitable than an actual Tory.

by Anonymousreply 290March 4, 2024 8:14 AM

[quote] It's funny how the twits who point to something they saw on The Crown to prove to us just how awful the royals apparently are don't realise just how much of a fool they're making of themselves.

So how is real life different from the show? Do the servants interact freely with the royals? I suspect they get those kinds of details correct.

by Anonymousreply 291March 4, 2024 7:35 PM

As much as I dislike Penny Mordaunt, I have to admit she looked freaking amazing at the coronation.

by Anonymousreply 292March 4, 2024 7:54 PM

[quote] So how is real life different from the show? Do the servants interact freely with the royals? I suspect they get those kinds of details correct.

R291, I think it depends very much on the royal in question. The generation of the Queen Mother and Princess Margaret were accustomed to much more deference. And I’m sure most rich people who have masses of staff in heir house have times when they prefer not to see them, just as the staff don’t want to see their employers all the time.

In the younger generations, there is much less formality, I saw a report that Harry and William (when they shared a staff) had urged the staff not to use titles and not to stand up when they came into a room. However, the senior staff insisted on still standing up when a royal enters the room, because they felt it was part of their job to make Harry and William get used to the fact that people would always regard them as the centre of attention.

William and Kate are known to expect less formality from staff in their homes. They have banned staff from wearing ties, so that their children grow up in a relatively more normal environment.

I’m sure there is always some formality because there is a always a boss and an employee in the relationship, but even Prince Phillip and Queen Elizabeth (especially in later years) lived in a much more low-key way than previous generations of royals would have found tolerable. Phillip retreated to a farmhouse on the Sandringham estate with a handful of staff who were expected to adapt to the much less formal pace of life, and The Queen, although still on duty, was very close to her dresser, the daughter of a former miner, and would watch TV with her closest staff members.

Most of the royals prompt a great deal of loyalty from their staff, who tend to stay in their jobs for a long period of time. The big exception to this seems to be Harry and Meghan. Kate seems like a good egg, and took baby Louis round to Clarence House to introduce him to the staff.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 293March 4, 2024 10:13 PM

I very much doubt that the "servants" prostrated themselves or backed up against the wall whenever the Queen or Princess Margaret passed them in the corridor.

by Anonymousreply 294March 4, 2024 10:58 PM

Pancreatic cancer

by Anonymousreply 295March 4, 2024 11:02 PM

The peasants who are fortunate enough to work for me and what's his name had best prostrate themselves on the floor in my presence if they know what's good for them!

by Anonymousreply 296March 4, 2024 11:28 PM

When Prince Philip died, the servants lined up outside the building as his casket was brought out. Newscasters at the time remarked that Philip's staff had been with him for years.

by Anonymousreply 297March 4, 2024 11:35 PM

Well, if it's pancreatic cancer, good to know ya Cholly.

by Anonymousreply 298March 4, 2024 11:46 PM

Poor Charles had to receive the Chancellor today, as he (the Chancellor) announced his stupid new budget.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 299March 5, 2024 3:38 PM

I hope it’s not pancreatic cancer because that is a miserable way to go. He waited so many years to be king and now this.

by Anonymousreply 300March 5, 2024 4:12 PM

I doubt he was actively waiting to be King, r300. What do people even mean when they say things like that?

by Anonymousreply 301March 5, 2024 4:29 PM

[quote] I doubt he was actively waiting to be King,

🤡

by Anonymousreply 302March 5, 2024 4:30 PM

If William becomes king, will he wipe out Harry, Meghan, Camilla, and Virginia Giuffre like Michael Corleone at the end of The Godfather?

by Anonymousreply 303March 5, 2024 4:34 PM

R302 is one of those many posters on DL who doesn't actually understand what it means to be the King.

by Anonymousreply 304March 5, 2024 4:37 PM

Re: R303, it'll (metaphorically) happen a while later, like with Fredo.

by Anonymousreply 305March 5, 2024 4:38 PM

No, r303. He'll simply ignore them, aside from Camilla.

by Anonymousreply 306March 5, 2024 4:38 PM

That’s not very cinematic, r306

by Anonymousreply 307March 5, 2024 4:46 PM

Unlike His Royal Highness King r304 the First, who’s been there and done that.

Meanwhile, back on planet Reality

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 308March 5, 2024 4:50 PM

I’m sorry, but Charles slipping off the throne to lie in a heap after being such a tiresome try-hard about gaining it decade after decade is fairly amusing.

Poor, singleminded nepo baby can’t do anything right.

by Anonymousreply 309March 5, 2024 4:55 PM

Are you suggesting he was attempting to assassinate his mother, r309?

by Anonymousreply 310March 5, 2024 5:34 PM

Modern members of the British Royal family would never visit violence upon each other. Those days are long gone. Put such silly ideas out of your head this instant. The very idea . . .

by Anonymousreply 311March 5, 2024 6:05 PM

Charles knew his job as Prince of Wales.

He will not have enough time to grow into the position of King.

William is fucked.

by Anonymousreply 312March 5, 2024 6:26 PM

[quote]William is fucked.

His Grandmother became the Monarch at age 25. William is 41. Mature enough to step up.

by Anonymousreply 313March 5, 2024 6:36 PM

George V died in 1936, Elizabeth was 10. Her entire childhood was raised as Princess of York.

George V, Q Mary, her father and mother, TRH Duke and Duchess of York, raised Elizabeth as a proper Victorian/Edwardian royal.

Then, the years of 3 King and Elizabeth became the heiress presumptive until her father died "peacefully" at Sandringham (as did her grandfather) in 1952.

Wills has had no such training and has suffered through the effects of the BRF divorces, Great Aunt Margaret Rose, His father as The Prince of Wales, The Princess Royal, Prince Andrew, plus lesser royals. And history shows she was keenly aware of Philips dalliances.

Poor Wills. He has no foundation of being King.

by Anonymousreply 314March 5, 2024 7:12 PM

Waiting for C3 to "peacefully" die in his sleep.

by Anonymousreply 315March 5, 2024 7:14 PM

R299 how do you know the budget is stupid, it hasn’t been revealed yet.

by Anonymousreply 316March 5, 2024 7:15 PM

"Her entire childhood was raised as Princess of York." - That would be a bit difficult, r314, considering there's no such title as Princess of York.

by Anonymousreply 317March 5, 2024 7:17 PM

R316, it's a pre-election budget that - according to all reports - will try to entice us with a "tax cut", although this will be a national insurance rather than an income tax cut. In other words, it's resorting to old Tory election tricks of promises of "tax cuts" while not actually promising a real tax cut.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 318March 5, 2024 7:21 PM

r317, really?

21 April 1926 – 11 December 1936: Her Royal Highness Princess Elizabeth of York. ⬅⬅⬅

11 December 1936 – 20 November 1947: Her Royal Highness The Princess Elizabeth.

20 November 1947 – 6 February 1952: Her Royal Highness The Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh.

by Anonymousreply 319March 5, 2024 7:51 PM

No! We CAN’T lose another monarch!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 320March 5, 2024 7:53 PM

There’s a difference between Princess Elizabeth of York and Princess of York.

I was there, too!

by Anonymousreply 321March 5, 2024 7:56 PM

Indeed.

by Anonymousreply 322March 5, 2024 7:59 PM

I still can't believe that old coot Harald traveled so far for a vacation. Travel is stressful on seniors and he'd already been in poor health. Elizabeth restricted her travel to short European trips in her mid 80s and stopped altogether at 88. Norway had to send a special medical flight, charged to the airforce.

by Anonymousreply 323March 5, 2024 8:11 PM

Sorry guys, you got exactly what I meant.

by Anonymousreply 324March 5, 2024 8:17 PM

We need some fun. Below a story in the Maul about all the hot equerries around the joint.

by Anonymousreply 325March 5, 2024 8:19 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 326March 5, 2024 8:20 PM

Exactly , r319, there is no such title as Princess of York, as you demonstrate with that list, in which the formulation "Princess of York" does not appear.

R322 also proves that there is no such title by reminding us that the daughters of the current Duke of York are never referred to as "Princess of York". For that matter, their mother was never known as the Princess of York.

by Anonymousreply 327March 5, 2024 8:22 PM

LOL, you guys...pedantic much today?

by Anonymousreply 328March 5, 2024 8:28 PM

Sorry, but you totally understood what I meant when you corrected me for the lack of an "a".

My statement was in comparison to Will's royal education before his father became king.

My conclusion was how to deal with all the royal divorces.

by Anonymousreply 329March 5, 2024 8:28 PM

Actually cancer has King Charles

by Anonymousreply 330March 5, 2024 8:29 PM

William spent significant amounts of time in training with his grandmother.

by Anonymousreply 331March 5, 2024 9:10 PM

R329 Why are all those divorces a problem for William?

by Anonymousreply 332March 5, 2024 9:19 PM

I have no inside or definitive knowledge but a good scan of the information and chatter /speculation about Charles cancer online suggests to me that the smart money is on it being bladder cancer.

by Anonymousreply 333March 5, 2024 10:54 PM

It's the only thing his father had to navigate as PoW.

I hope Chuck opts for a Regency instead of a Sandringham needle.

by Anonymousreply 334March 6, 2024 12:05 AM

Re: R326. The curtain-twitching pearl-clutching 'Mail' this morning comes across as a Datalounger on heat. Strap boxed headline with pics: "Where DO the royals find all these smoking HOT EQUERRIES!" A fair try at upbeat distraction from serious medical matters.

by Anonymousreply 335March 6, 2024 7:56 AM

The tabloids often have articles on the equerries, r335, and they're still churning out the "health" stories, even though they're isn't much new to say there.

by Anonymousreply 336March 6, 2024 8:22 AM

[quote]A fair try at upbeat distraction from serious medical matters.

I'm all in favor of distractions like this.

by Anonymousreply 337March 6, 2024 4:03 PM

It heard what happened was Kate was picked up in a sting operation Re: an upper class call girl operation. I don’t know if it’s current, or has to do with her past.

Either way, it puts the palace in a very awkward position. William probably missed that funeral to explain her detainment and interrogation to the kiddos.

Expect to hear more about this.

by Anonymousreply 338March 6, 2024 8:10 PM

Eww, a funeral that took place a whole year after the deceased had died.

by Anonymousreply 339March 6, 2024 8:21 PM

I told you she’s a whore.

by Anonymousreply 340March 6, 2024 8:26 PM

I just flashed this after reading the card reader guy, Ant. He is very interesting. Maybe Kate is in a relationship with one of the equerries! Can you imagine??

by Anonymousreply 341March 7, 2024 1:33 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 342March 7, 2024 11:24 AM

Hi again, Meghan at R338.

by Anonymousreply 343March 7, 2024 11:58 AM

Poor William. He wants time to support his family after his wife's serious illness but now his nose is out of joint because Camilla's getting the better gigs.

You ever think media makes things up as much as we do?

by Anonymousreply 344March 7, 2024 12:00 PM

A lot of people on here seem to be certain William hates Camilla. What is the evidence for that? I haven't seen it demonstrated.

William knew what a problem Diana was and how little she cared for or gave to Charles. I don't know whether she really fancied herself in love with him when she was 19. I doubt it, I think she was in love with the idea of herself as a princess and projected that onto Charles, but by the time William was old enough to notice, Diana was showing contempt for Charles even on public engagements, when she was supposed to be acting professionally.

Even stuff like R342's link is about William and Charles, not about William's view of Camilla, who is just doing what Charles wants.

by Anonymousreply 345March 7, 2024 12:03 PM

A lot of people on here are certain Kate donated her prostate during a hair extension transplant that went horribly wrong between Johns. It is infuriating in some way. Maybe they're just trolling but otherwise the amount certain stupid is infuriating. Just wow level.

by Anonymousreply 346March 7, 2024 12:05 PM

Shit, I forgot the cavalcade through London that went near a hospital not involved in her treatment right after Christmas. Maybe the hospital is red herring. She was just travelling from hotel to hotel.

by Anonymousreply 347March 7, 2024 12:06 PM

[quote] I don't know whether she really fancied herself in love with him when she was 19. I doubt it, I think she was in love with the idea of herself as a princess and projected that onto Charles

I think Paul Burrell said Diana told him Charles was the love of her life. Always seemed odd to me.

by Anonymousreply 348March 7, 2024 12:42 PM

From Gone with the Wind: "I made a pretty suit of clothes and fell in love with it. And when Ashley came riding along, so handsome, so different, I put that suit on him and made him wear it whether it fitted him or not. And I wouldn't see what he really was. I kept on loving the pretty clothes—and not him at all."

by Anonymousreply 349March 7, 2024 2:06 PM

William doesn’t have to like Camila but publicly he should show respect and I think he has done that well enough that we don’t know how he truly feels about her except for gossip here and there.

William will always love his mother and most likely side with her even if her behavior was not the best because it’s his mother and their bond was strong enough that she confided in him.

by Anonymousreply 350March 7, 2024 3:27 PM

A mother’s confiding in her child about her marital problems is a form of child abuse, IMO.

by Anonymousreply 351March 7, 2024 3:33 PM

From what I read he was appalled and upset that clueless mummy put him in that position.

by Anonymousreply 352March 7, 2024 3:36 PM

It might be, R351, if it was done with wanton disregard for the child. But Diana, as we all know, had emotional difficulties that she often couldn't control. I don't excuse her but I don't think she did anything purposely either. She was just one massive set of feelings with poor controls, isolated and mistrustful. They both paid a price for what life handed them. They all did. I mean, there are no villains in the piece, really, (except for the children) because everybody seems to have behaved villainously at one time or another. It was a bad coupling that just got worse and worse. I don't think any of them were bad people though, just behaving badly. Life is complicated because we make bad choices.

by Anonymousreply 353March 7, 2024 4:09 PM

Well said, r353.

by Anonymousreply 354March 7, 2024 4:16 PM

Thanks, R354. I remember peak Diana. She was a remarkable figure in human history, just for the phenomenon of her. I have a bit of a soft spot for her memory. She was a fascinating figure who did amazing things and horrible things but I always had the impression at the root of her was always love: too much, too little, or thwarted.

by Anonymousreply 355March 7, 2024 4:25 PM

[quote] I mean, there are no villains in the piece, really, (except for the children)

That's "well said"?

by Anonymousreply 356March 7, 2024 4:28 PM

How's fuck off run ya, R356? Don't reply. Enjoy the block.

by Anonymousreply 357March 7, 2024 4:31 PM

[quote] She was a fascinating figure who did amazing things and horrible things

She did horrible things? She was a tall pretty nob with a big nose and a flair for the dramatic. Whose eyeballs did she poke out? Which babies did she rape?

by Anonymousreply 358March 7, 2024 4:38 PM

We can't choose our parents. Lots of people have crazy borderline mothers, beautiful or not. Coupled with an absent ostrich head burying father, William's relationship w his mum was reversed roles with him parenting her. No surprise he made a smart choice in stable, dependable Kate with her supportive, functional family.

by Anonymousreply 359March 7, 2024 4:44 PM

I don't believe William hates Camilla (probably did when he was younger), rather, I think he accepts Camilla. Unlike Harry, I think marriage and becoming a father has matured William to the point he understand his mother's issues and her own imperfections and accepts that Camilla is the love of his father's life. If he wants to have a good relationship with his father, he recognizes he must have a civil relationship with Camilla.

by Anonymousreply 360March 7, 2024 5:02 PM

He resents her like an osteoporosis knee that winces on occasion.

by Anonymousreply 361March 7, 2024 5:39 PM

Well, R358, as observed she dragged her children into her marital breakdown. She banged any number of married men while objecting heartily to Camilla banging her husband. The Morton book. The Panorama interview. She was hell of wheels. And totally awesome.

by Anonymousreply 362March 7, 2024 6:40 PM

I think William also recognizes that Camilla knows how to handle Charles, she keeps him on an even keel. I doubt they have screaming matches like William must have witnessed with Diana and he’s grateful for that.

by Anonymousreply 363March 8, 2024 1:58 AM

[quote] Wills has had no such training

Untrue.

William visited his grandmother across the river at Windsor every weekend while he was at Eton to take lessons from her as to how to reign.

by Anonymousreply 364March 8, 2024 2:59 AM

William benefitted from his close relationship not just with his grandmother but also his great-grandmother, who lived till he was about 20 and could talk to him all about monarchy in the early 20th century. Now he has seen how the transition to a new monarch can happen with his father. The personal difficulties of his mother and her tragic, early death have taught him about adversity but also the importance of stability and values and being strong in the face of tragedy. He will make a great king.

by Anonymousreply 365March 8, 2024 6:38 AM

He will be the last King, r365.

by Anonymousreply 366March 8, 2024 10:53 AM

No, he will be the last king of the UK, he will remain a king of England.

by Anonymousreply 367March 8, 2024 12:20 PM

He will not be the last king of either England or the UK. Anyone who claims that knows absolutely nothing about England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.

by Anonymousreply 368March 8, 2024 12:28 PM

The BRF has no value to NI, or Scotland.

The BRF in not an impediment to the unification of Ireland or Scottish devolvement.

by Anonymousreply 369March 8, 2024 12:35 PM

What is " Scottish devolvement"?

by Anonymousreply 370March 8, 2024 1:18 PM

[quote] He will be the last King, [R365].

Don’t be silly. George will reign.

For a while.

by Anonymousreply 371March 8, 2024 1:19 PM

R370, the concept that Queen Anne's ministers put together a union of independent states in 1707 to form the UK, by which the union could devolve back into independent states.

by Anonymousreply 372March 8, 2024 1:45 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 373March 8, 2024 1:49 PM

R372, you don't actually know what you're talking about, do you?

by Anonymousreply 374March 8, 2024 6:46 PM

r374, talk to the Scottish.

by Anonymousreply 375March 8, 2024 6:54 PM

He could be, but I doubt it. It goes on and on and on. And as noted above, the constitutional implications are so massive it would take a major earthquake to make dissolution of the monarchy seem worth the trouble.

by Anonymousreply 376March 8, 2024 8:40 PM

Scotland couldn't give a fuck

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 377March 8, 2024 8:42 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 378March 8, 2024 8:43 PM

The Scots would wonder who the fuck anyone who talks about their future "devolvement" is on about, r375.

by Anonymousreply 379March 8, 2024 9:19 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 380March 9, 2024 1:01 AM

New photo of Catherine and the kids

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 381March 10, 2024 1:12 PM

New photo of Catherine and the kids

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 382March 10, 2024 1:12 PM

Are the skinny jeans meant to indicate I don't have a bag, bitches? Because a colostomy bag in those skin tights... that's willpower, I'd reckon.

by Anonymousreply 383March 10, 2024 1:14 PM

I'd say it's a beautiful picture. May she recover in peace. Proof of life for DL.

by Anonymousreply 384March 10, 2024 1:22 PM

She's not wearing her rings! They will divorce before she dies! RIP!

by Anonymousreply 385March 10, 2024 1:26 PM

It is a beautiful photo. She looks healthy, her face is a bit fuller. The kids look happy. Hoping the rest of her recovery goes well.

by Anonymousreply 386March 10, 2024 1:39 PM

[quote] Well, [R358], as observed she dragged her children into her marital breakdown. She banged any number of married men while objecting heartily to Camilla banging her husband.

What utter nonsense. All of this was caused by her husband’s flagrant adultery and juvenile jealousy of her. Talk about blaming the victim.

by Anonymousreply 387March 10, 2024 1:43 PM

R387 you have a curious sense of adulthood.

by Anonymousreply 388March 10, 2024 2:02 PM

R387 is right. I think if Charles had really loved Diana like a mature adult does, they would still be married today. He just didn’t, and that’s what caused the domino to fall.

by Anonymousreply 389March 10, 2024 2:31 PM

They were wildly incompatible and both of them had a hand in the failure of that disastrous marriage. I say this as someone who really liked Diana. But irrespective of who fired the first shot in the war of the Waleses, they shouldn't have married in the first place. They were a disaster for each other before either one of them started messing with the other one.

by Anonymousreply 390March 10, 2024 2:35 PM

I always wonder if the people who are so outraged that Charles and Diana divorced have ever been in relationships and if they hate all people who've divorced or just Charles.

by Anonymousreply 391March 10, 2024 3:34 PM

R389 sounds like an Opus Dei Catholic female who only has a community college education in Early Childhood Education, lives with her parents at the age of 35, and expects a good and prosperous marriage with at least a Traditional Catholic man. She's particularly eyeing the obits for potential suitors (widower with children in need) because divorced men are off limits.

by Anonymousreply 392March 10, 2024 4:16 PM

Charles wants a strong controlling woman to put him in his place and tell him what to do. He sees that as being supportive. Diana was not that, so as long as he carried a torch for Camilla, he never gave his marriage to Diana a fair chance, and their marriage was doomed.

by Anonymousreply 393March 10, 2024 5:15 PM

R393, you’re so wrong on EVERY characteristic you say I am. Sooo not Catholic (or religious). Not female. Went to an Ivy League school (go Quakers!). Have my own home plus a rental property. Retired and very comfortable. Never, ever wanted to get married or have kids, but many of my friends are married and have kids. A lot are happy. A lot are semi-happy. Marriage takes a ton of work (work I’m not willing to do). But the marriages that work started out on a strong foundation of mutual respect as well as love. Charles had neither for Diana.

by Anonymousreply 394March 10, 2024 6:07 PM

I really don't give a shit about a stranger's personal relationship problems 40 years ago. Jesus.

by Anonymousreply 395March 10, 2024 6:52 PM

Are you gay, r394?

by Anonymousreply 396March 10, 2024 6:56 PM

I’m a single older man on DL, r 396. What do you t

by Anonymousreply 397March 10, 2024 8:06 PM

Hah that post before I could fix the typos at r397. Meant to say; I’m a single older man on DL. What do you think?

by Anonymousreply 398March 10, 2024 8:07 PM

[quote]She's not wearing her rings!

She got tired of them, and flung them out to the crowds. "Anyone want Diana's sapphire? HERE!"

by Anonymousreply 399March 10, 2024 8:09 PM

Has this happened before?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 400March 10, 2024 10:10 PM

I don’t know about that, photos are touched up all the time. Doesn’t mean some vast conspiracy is at work. Maybe one of the kids had a mustard stain.

by Anonymousreply 401March 10, 2024 10:15 PM

Meant to add at r401, I’m thinking many press associations refuse to distribute manipulated photos on principle. But doesn’t mean anything nefarious is happening.

by Anonymousreply 402March 10, 2024 10:17 PM

I don't even see any problems with those "problems". Anyhow, are any of us real?

by Anonymousreply 403March 10, 2024 10:20 PM

To take the tinfoil hat off for a second - isn’t the most likely explanation that fidgety kids weren’t all looking the right way at the same time so multiple images were composited to make a good photo?

Pretty standard in family photography.

by Anonymousreply 404March 10, 2024 10:26 PM

I saw a documentary about servants and Queen Elizabeth. IIRC, the first greeting of the day, they address her as "Your Majesty." Thereafter, they call her "Mum." (Or "Ma'am"? Maybe it was the accent.) Seriously. I was surprised.

I doubt they are bowing and curtseying multiple times per day. Maybe first thing in the morning.

Governesses and nannies, I think it would be a bad idea to have them bowing and curtseying to their charges (royal children).

by Anonymousreply 405March 10, 2024 10:43 PM

OMG - they are German! Charlotte hand transplant von Frankenstein!

by Anonymousreply 406March 10, 2024 10:57 PM

I'm sure photos are retouched but this is blowing up as a media story. If the intent was to tamp down speculation about Catherine, has done the opposite. Surely they have the ability to hire qualified people?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 407March 10, 2024 10:58 PM

This blowup on media is evidence of how fucking crazy media is today and nothing else.

by Anonymousreply 408March 10, 2024 11:23 PM

So very confused why the portrait is a problem. I just got back home after seeing it this morning. All of a sudden it's problematic?

by Anonymousreply 409March 10, 2024 11:30 PM

I guess it's a reason to get hysterical. shrug

by Anonymousreply 410March 10, 2024 11:31 PM

AI went to town. Love the cig. Don't know where the extra kid came from.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 411March 10, 2024 11:34 PM

R405 "ma'am", not "mum" :-) And that is correct: The first time you meet the monarch (be it a singular meeting or simply the start of your workday at the palace), you address him as "Your Majesty", and after that - in KC3's case - as "sir". For QE2, that was "ma'am" (and NOT "madam"!).

Curtsies are reserved for the King and his wife the Queen. However, it would certainly not be unusual for someone to address William's daughter, Charlotte, as "Your Royal Highness", because that is what she is, no matter her age.

by Anonymousreply 412March 10, 2024 11:52 PM

Personally I think this whole picture thing is going to backfire on the media (as all the reporting on the SM conspiracies last week). It just looks like bullying Catherine while she recovers. It will also likely mean that William and Kate will become even stricter with photos of their children which the press will then complain about.

by Anonymousreply 413March 11, 2024 1:15 AM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 414March 11, 2024 1:26 AM

IS HE DEAD YET?????!!!!!!!

by Anonymousreply 415March 11, 2024 4:58 AM

No Kingly church-walk pics from yesterday. But Kate's mistaken Mother's Day gift to the world will distract, and hold attention for quite a while.

by Anonymousreply 416March 11, 2024 2:15 PM

I support William and Kate but I sometimes wonder if William won't be the one to wreck the monarchy, with his view on how it should be done. The strength of the monarchy is that it doesn't change a great deal, it provides continuity, consistency and familiarity. I think, with all good intentions, there's a risk given his desire to focus in key areas, that he leaves too much behind or excludes too much and the monarchy becomes too niche and possibly too political.

I think this Kate thing has been unhelpful, but I take the view maybe it won't matter once she's back on the road. She is entitled to her privacy. She is not head of state and never will be. Yet... these days... you know the dilemma.

I think one of the challenges for them is that they are still very top down and insular... they are telling the world they will change but also how. There's no engagement, no consultation (that we know of.) Why not strike a process to solicit ideas about how the monarchy can best support modern Britain? Maybe nobody ever wanted a slimmed down royal family. Maybe they like a larger group fanning out and supporting and attending widely. Who knows? This is just Charles' vision, and while the logic is obvious, here we are with a weakened bench. Maybe people aren't aligned with William's environmental/homelessness focus. Or maybe he should be free to pursue that emphasis supported by a wider royal family who can pick up the slack and provide the attentive continuity that is best exemplified by Princess Anne. I mean, I get the Garter ceremony but it looks bonkers in 2024. So you don't have to ditch it but you may need to update it.

The point is when you don't consult, you're seeing it all through your own bias, and at risk of getting it wrong. I think Charles could adapt to being a private citizen. He's got a lot of private interests and would probably thrive as a country gentleman, organicking the hell out of his gardens. William seems rather like his mother, more attuned to making change. But he could fuck it up.

by Anonymousreply 417March 11, 2024 2:35 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 418March 11, 2024 2:38 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 419March 11, 2024 2:39 PM

You raise some valid points, R417. I think the idea of consulting "the people" on what their monarchy should be like goes against the concept of stability and continuity. The whole idea is that things keep going on as they have for hundreds of years, with only small updates, no matter what state the country (or the world) is in.

They need good advisors, not staunch courtiers, who understand the pulse of today's society and who can foresee where the trends are heading. And then they need to listen.

The BRF has one luxury that no other "brand" has: TIME. They are there, enshrined in Britain's history and "constitution", and they aren't going anywhere. That makes the rush job of Kate's recent picture all the more questionable: It was done in a panic. They should have stayed the course, with Kate resurfacing after Easter, as they so clearly communicated.

Reliability, trustworthiness, and seeing things through always wins the race.

by Anonymousreply 420March 11, 2024 3:05 PM

I agree, R420, and I get the reluctance on consultation. I wasn't quite sure I meant the general population, but definitely people close to the ground. You can poll and focus group the general population under the radar and without raising expectations. You are especially right about good advisors. I feel like William runs the risk of going it alone, too headstrong. Not as bad as, erm, other members of the family, but still feels like it's there. The whole missing the memorial for personal business and that's all you get thing recently. Then again, maybe he holds the line, and people accept and respect it. In the end, Twitter is not to be taken seriously because most people aren't on it and most who are, are nuts.

by Anonymousreply 421March 11, 2024 3:15 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 422March 11, 2024 3:17 PM

They should employ us, R421 — We'd know how to steady the buffs and keep calm.

by Anonymousreply 423March 11, 2024 3:21 PM

"Headstrong" because he wants to ensure his wife is safe and protected and able to recover comfortably after major surgery? Again, the actual general public have no issue with any of this. It is the crazed media that desperately wants constant access that is creating the fake furore.

by Anonymousreply 424March 11, 2024 3:40 PM

By the way, some klutzy photo editing and then an apology simply make the royals, especially William and Kate in this instance, seem more like an ordinary family trying to raise young kids and endear them even more to the public. A dad trying to take a Mother's Day photo with all 3 kids smiling and looking at the camera at the same time, mum trying to fix the photo afterwards because the kids kept shifting about. After all the media and online bullying, especially while Kate is still recovering from surgery, it simply makes the public more sympathetic to them.

by Anonymousreply 425March 11, 2024 3:51 PM

Love those 80 million views!

by Anonymousreply 426March 11, 2024 4:31 PM

r417, there has been strings of loser Monarchs in the UK, but in the internet era, the Windsors cannot manage a string of dubious Kings as George V and Silly Billy, before another Victoria.

If I were Prince Georgie, I would watch my back...

by Anonymousreply 427March 11, 2024 4:40 PM

He does look very ill.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 428March 11, 2024 5:00 PM

Definitely lost weight and hair.

by Anonymousreply 429March 11, 2024 5:03 PM

Uh yeah, chemo does that.

by Anonymousreply 430March 11, 2024 5:30 PM

He looks a little worse for wear, but not alarmingly, IMO.

by Anonymousreply 431March 11, 2024 6:02 PM

And for picky people, I meant G IV

r427

by Anonymousreply 432March 11, 2024 6:02 PM

The royal family no longer bow and curtsy to each other, except to the king and queen (and any living queens dowager).

Usually after the first "Your Majesty" and bow (or curtsy), for the rest of the day servants just quickly dip their head when they run into the king or queen.

by Anonymousreply 433March 11, 2024 6:07 PM

The King is looking also a bit blue here. Perhaps an edit of the photo non?

by Anonymousreply 434March 12, 2024 7:16 AM

Lots of churn in social media that Buckingham Palace has BBC on alert for a very big story. I have a feeling it’s about Charles.

by Anonymousreply 435March 17, 2024 3:47 AM

r435 All the deaths of other elderly royals, Princess Alexandra, The Duke of Kent, The Duchess of Kent , Prince or Princess Michael of Kent? Could even be an announcement the Sussexes are being stripped of their titles or that Beatrice and or Eugenie are too become working royals? Lots of possibilities.

by Anonymousreply 436March 17, 2024 3:55 AM

[quote]Could even be an announcement the Sussexes are being stripped of their titles

Klan Grannies never give up.

by Anonymousreply 437March 17, 2024 3:59 AM

No way it’s about the Sussexes or Beatrice or Eugenie. For one, I don’t think they would make any move on the Sussexes right now (bigger fish to fry).. Might be about one of the elder royals. I have no idea, just sharing rumors I’ve seen on Twitter and TikTok.

by Anonymousreply 438March 17, 2024 3:59 AM

If Chuck Kicks the bucket and Wills is William V, there is no way they are going to potentially cut back the BRF working or not.

by Anonymousreply 439March 17, 2024 4:06 AM

r437 Sugars never do logic. It would be a very timely and rational response to the launch of Meghans company as its royal branding directly goes against the terms of the Sandringham agreement.I am suggesting it as random or arbitary at all.

by Anonymousreply 440March 17, 2024 4:29 AM

r438 I get why you think the Sussexes wont be the announcement but I dont think its mad to think it is about Beatrice and Eugenie-especially if one of the elderly royals is stepping back from duties for health reasons. Princess Alexandra uses a wheelchair a lot of the time now.

by Anonymousreply 441March 17, 2024 4:31 AM

r440 I am not suggesting it as random or arbitary

by Anonymousreply 442March 17, 2024 4:32 AM

So what’s the announcement?

by Anonymousreply 443March 17, 2024 11:43 AM

Could it be colon cancer?

by Anonymousreply 444March 17, 2024 12:04 PM

My bet is pancreatic cancer. Less than 6 months left.

by Anonymousreply 445March 17, 2024 12:22 PM

I'm sure social media has it right and a big announcement is coming that put the BBC on stand by but nobody else. And the Palace would definitely choose a Sunday announcement because the last Sunday news cycle it got caught up in worked out so well.

by Anonymousreply 446March 17, 2024 1:32 PM

So much for the announcement today LOL

by Anonymousreply 447March 17, 2024 8:31 PM

All just bullshit, R447.

Rumour is that CIII has bladder cancer, which was (naturally!) detected as they were checking up his nether regions. Bladder cancer is considered very "treatable", especially when caught early.

Charles looks a bit worn down in recent pictures, the chemo therapy most likely messed up his immune system, and that's why his bottom lip is showing signs of canker sores and irritation. King or not, he is a man in his mid-70s, so the treatment alone would be quite a burden. But since he is still taking appointments and posing for pictures, I think (and hope) he will be fine.

by Anonymousreply 448March 17, 2024 8:38 PM

R448, we’re not sure if chemo is being used actually. I saw someone post something about radiotherapy, which I understand is very tough as well.

by Anonymousreply 449March 17, 2024 8:41 PM

How crazy is it that the literal monarch has cancer and it's practically a blip on the royal news landscape?

by Anonymousreply 450March 17, 2024 9:00 PM

R449 You are right. I spoke out of turn; I think I somehow digested the assumptions about possible chemotherapy as official communiqué.

by Anonymousreply 451March 17, 2024 10:15 PM

R451, I assumed it too, I only thought twice when I saw a rumor he was getting radiotherapy. Any DL doctors know why he would get that instead of chemo?

by Anonymousreply 452March 17, 2024 10:20 PM

Radiotherapy is generally used at the earlier stages, depending on the cancer. It targets the specific area and is often used to shrink any tumor prior to surgery.

Chemo is aimed at potential cancer cells anywhere in the body.

My experience was that radio hurts like hell in the targeted area while chemo made me feel fatigued and nauseated. Although I was prepared for it I didn’t lose my hair.

by Anonymousreply 453March 17, 2024 10:31 PM

R453, I wish the best for your recovery.

by Anonymousreply 454March 17, 2024 10:37 PM

Thanks, r453 I wish you well too. If Charles is receiving radiotherapy, maybe they were right that it was caught early.

by Anonymousreply 455March 17, 2024 10:42 PM

From the photographs, Charles looks a little thinner, but his hair is still hanging on.

by Anonymousreply 456March 17, 2024 10:48 PM

I would think that even if your cancer was advanced, they first do radiation to shrink the tumor and then surgery to remove it. Chemo might could shrink it too (?) Then chemo after surgery to "mop up" any cancer lurking around, that they couldn't see.

But if there were tumors in multiple organs, that would mean it's traveled through the lymph or blood system, and there might not be any point in doing surgery because it would be a cure and you'd need to hurry up with the best chemo or immunotherapy you had to treat all the tumors at the same time, instead of wasting time on removing just one.

So maybe it's good news if he has surgery after this radiotherapy.

by Anonymousreply 457March 18, 2024 1:53 AM

Thanks R454 and R455.

by Anonymousreply 458March 18, 2024 1:53 AM

* because surgery WOULDN'T be a cure (if the cancer is in multiple organs/lymph nodes)

by Anonymousreply 459March 18, 2024 1:53 AM

Has social media said yet when the new announcement time will be?

by Anonymousreply 460March 18, 2024 1:22 PM

There is no new announcement, Svetlana.

by Anonymousreply 461March 18, 2024 5:21 PM

Harkles removed from the royal website as working royals. Quite right, of course, as they are not working royals and never will be again.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 462March 18, 2024 5:48 PM

That's good news!

by Anonymousreply 463March 18, 2024 5:51 PM

Yes, should have happened years ago, r463. Meghan really messed up when she tried to merch her royal title.

by Anonymousreply 464March 18, 2024 5:56 PM

Are you saying that all the insane online attacks on the royals coming from accounts that claim to be Sussex fans are really posted by Russian trolls, r461?

by Anonymousreply 465March 18, 2024 5:58 PM

r462, even the Pedophile has a link on the page.

by Anonymousreply 466March 18, 2024 6:01 PM

Sex with a legal adult isn't pedophilia, r466. But, yes, the fact that Andrew hasn't been removed but they have shows that they stepped way out of line. No doubt they were told not to merch a royal title, and who knows what else was going on behind the scenes. This suggests to me that Meghan was told not to use her title to sell stuff yet she went ahead and did it. And all still with no actual products or content, so there was no need for her to rush out these placeholders - unless she had some other motive.

by Anonymousreply 467March 18, 2024 6:35 PM

If W5 ends up a widower, I see Georgie cutting ribbons in the aisles of Waitrose, before puberty.

by Anonymousreply 468March 18, 2024 6:45 PM

Lol, they're back. Their photo was just changed to some hippy thing, with the point being made that they are no longer working royals.

[quote]As announced in January 2020, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have stepped back as working members of The Royal Family. The couple married in St George's Chapel, Windsor on 19 May 2018 and have two children: Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex.

Aw, this bit is so cute:

[quote]Prior to her marriage to The Duke of Sussex in 2018, The Duchess worked as an actress, appearing in film and television. She most notably played the role of Rachel Zane on the series Suits for seven seasons, completing over 100 episodes. Alongside her successful career as an actress, The Duchess also wrote and edited a lifestyle website called The Tig.

Accompanied by a pic of her in Suits.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 469March 18, 2024 7:03 PM

R465 at worst yes. at best useful idiots. Is it any surprise that Russia and China are endeavoring to destabilize democratic countries via sm, particularly Britain and the US and their heads of state?

by Anonymousreply 470March 18, 2024 7:28 PM

Harry's profile on the royal website no longer says that he is fifth in line to the throne anymore. He's still there on the official line of succession page (that will not change, unless Charles, William and all William's kids die and we are confronted with the prospect of King Harry and so will get Queen Beatrice instead), but no longer in the line of succession in any meaningful way.

by Anonymousreply 471March 18, 2024 7:42 PM

Harry and Meghan used to have separate profiles on the Royal website, now they have just one combined profile. Slimming down.

by Anonymousreply 472March 18, 2024 8:56 PM

Harry and Meghan Downgraded On The Royal Website

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 473March 19, 2024 12:58 AM

I must say that it’s very quiet here today. What can have happened to all the experts who were predicting Charles’s death yesterday? Is Twitter still aflame?

by Anonymousreply 474March 19, 2024 4:29 AM

r474 Those rumours were largely propogated by dumb people, the same dumb people who keep ignoring the known established fact that Harry and Meghan asked for half in half out deal with the monarchy and didnt flee the evil monarchy in terror but later disnified their story into a fairytale. All done in plain sight publicly and they still rationalize the story as if it didnt happen. So yeah no surprise despite the lack of evidence many of the same types fell for twitter BS.

by Anonymousreply 475March 19, 2024 4:43 AM

Huh. The "Buckingham palace announcement" saga was actually Russia.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 476March 19, 2024 10:10 AM

r476 and propagated and repeated by idiot sugars all over twitter and it wasn just King Charles death as the non existent announcement they speculated they also speculated , Kate death, divorce etc was the announcement. Many even insisting it was a divorce announcement.

by Anonymousreply 477March 19, 2024 10:34 AM

Seeing if this works.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 478March 21, 2024 11:00 AM

Do you think it could be something in the Royal palaces causing cancer?

by Anonymousreply 479March 22, 2024 6:49 PM

Honestly, I think it's food additives. There's this measurable rise in colon cancers in young people. It doesn't make any sense.

by Anonymousreply 480March 22, 2024 7:17 PM

R479, in Britain we're told that one in two people will get cancer. You can have cancer for years and decades without ever realising it. Unfortunately, when you do start to see the symptoms it's often too late. Let's hope in both Catherine's and Charles' cases the cancer was caught at an early stage.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 481March 22, 2024 7:26 PM

UK health care doesn't test enough.

Cheaper to just give palliative care before hospice.

by Anonymousreply 482March 22, 2024 7:57 PM

They're starting to improve, r482, but unless every organ of the body is regularly scanned not every type of cancer will be caught in time.

by Anonymousreply 483March 22, 2024 8:20 PM

Poor Charles, he can't even get cancer without being upstaged by a younger, beautiful woman.

by Anonymousreply 484March 22, 2024 8:53 PM

So, I'm reading from places like People and InTouch Weekly that KC3 has pancreatic cancer and has 2 years to live. One characterized it as an "open secret" among courtiers. Any intel, DL?

Apologies if this has been discussed upthread as I'm still catching up.

by Anonymousreply 485March 26, 2024 9:44 PM

No intel, but that’s the rumor. I didn’t see People, but In Touch wrote an article. I don’t know if I buy it.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 486March 26, 2024 9:58 PM

Thanks r486. I misspoke, I did not see it in People, only ITW.

by Anonymousreply 487March 26, 2024 10:00 PM

It could be true but I doubt it. Mainly because if Charles was actually dying they'd have kept the cancer secret for far longer while they rush to prepare William and get the succession details ready.

by Anonymousreply 488March 26, 2024 10:05 PM

Honest Question: Has Charles contributed anything? What will his legacy be?

by Anonymousreply 489March 26, 2024 10:08 PM

Oh yes, "In Touch Weekly", the crap that not even a couple of weeks ago was informing us that William was having an affair and implying perhaps that's why Catherine had "disappeared".

by Anonymousreply 490March 26, 2024 10:24 PM

Charles currently contributes through performing his role as head of state, r489, which he's keeping up with through cancer treatment. As Prince of Wales he was one of the first, over 50 years ago before it was hip to talk about the need to protect the environment and put that into practice in the Duchy of Cornwall, which created an ongoing successful range of organic products. The Prince's Trust has helped thousands of young people over the decades. One of his biggest legacies will be William.

What exactly are you expecting? The monarch isn't meant to pass legislation.

by Anonymousreply 491March 26, 2024 10:30 PM

[quote]R491 What exactly are you expecting? The monarch isn't meant to pass legislation.

Well, but they are expected to contribute, as people with power, advantage, time, and vast resources.

I mean, I would HOPE.

by Anonymousreply 492March 26, 2024 10:54 PM

If it is in fact pancreatic cancer it is 98% fatal within 5 years. Most die 3 months - 2 years. And Charles was never a smoker, which is believed to be the primary case for this cancer, followed by ongoing inhalant exposure to certain toxic chemicals, excessive drinking, diabetes, obesity, genetics and certain bacteria. That would be a cruel twist of fate that Charles had to wait over 50 years as an adult to be crowned king, only to be soon diagnosed with a terminal cancer.

My uncle who never smoked in his life but in his occupation was exposed to toxins from glues, dyes, and soldering fumes was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer at age 80, given an approximate 4-6 months to live, and died just 5 weeks later from respiratory arrest.

by Anonymousreply 493March 26, 2024 11:35 PM

And, R492, R491 has provided some detail of just a little that the King, especially as Prince of Wales, has achieved. You could check out the link below but there are lots of words so it may be too much for you.

Tl;dr? The Prince’s Trust has provided support to over 1,000,000 11-30 year olds over the past 50 years.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 494March 26, 2024 11:57 PM

The Prince's Trust was one of the charitable groups that truly made a difference to so many young people lives over the decades.

by Anonymousreply 495March 27, 2024 12:01 AM

R492, the monarch is meant to be apolitical and the one thing he or she is absolutely not expected or permitted to do is try to influence the passage of legislation with people with power, advantage, time, and vast resources.

by Anonymousreply 496March 27, 2024 11:08 AM

I just asked what he contributed to the world… not what legislature he created.

by Anonymousreply 497March 27, 2024 3:37 PM

Will they even bother to put his image on the currency?

by Anonymousreply 498March 27, 2024 11:59 PM

It's already on the stamps and some currency in Canada.

by Anonymousreply 499March 28, 2024 12:02 AM

R498 , new banknotes released on June 5

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 500March 28, 2024 12:32 AM

He's the king of the United Kingdom, r497, why does he have to contribute to the whole world?

by Anonymousreply 501March 28, 2024 12:39 AM

No one said he had to contribute to the whole world. Obviously it’s about what he’s contributed as a royal.

by Anonymousreply 502March 28, 2024 5:25 AM

Oh, wait - someone did say that.

Sorry.

by Anonymousreply 503March 28, 2024 5:26 AM

And you got your answers, R497. To add: Charles made climate change a talking point DECADES ago, well before it was on people's radar.

I hope it isn't pancreatic -I doubt it is- and I wish him a speedy recovery and many more years.

by Anonymousreply 504March 28, 2024 2:00 PM

You kind of get the wisdom of not dislcosing the type of cancer, in retrospect. Suppose it cannot be cured. Imagine what's coming for William and Kate under normal circumstances. There's a lot to consider and plan for, done best in private, in fairness to all involved.

by Anonymousreply 505March 28, 2024 2:12 PM

I saw a screengrab of Chas' Easter soeech, and he looks good, nice suit.

by Anonymousreply 506March 28, 2024 2:17 PM

R492, you should do just a little research. He has headed numerous ecological and heritage projects, the latter always concerned with providing jobs for the disadvantaged youth of the area. The restoration of Dumfries House by the Prince's Trust, in which Charles was very much the arbiter of what should occur, they built outbuildings for young artists, a catering school and a school where tradesmen whose skills were needed for the restoration, but were in danger of dying out, could train young people to carry them forward. Most people who graduated from the schools could find work in Dumfries House or one of the other Royal residences, if they were not offered work on the open market.

He has changed many lives for the better, done very little grandstanding about it, and has done very little harm beyond the occasional tantrum. (I don't count Diana, because nobody could have handled her well unless Anne was allowed to slap her on the regular.)

by Anonymousreply 507March 29, 2024 1:21 AM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 508March 31, 2024 12:01 PM

King at Easter, The Times ^

The Telegraph below.

Looks well.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 509March 31, 2024 12:02 PM

The King and Queen Attend Easter Sunday Church Service.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 510March 31, 2024 12:14 PM

Likely his last Easter?

by Anonymousreply 511March 31, 2024 12:27 PM

I don't think so, r511. He could live a good few years. His cancer seems to have been caught early, and he seems to be responding to treatment ok.

by Anonymousreply 512March 31, 2024 1:38 PM

Or maybe yours.

by Anonymousreply 513March 31, 2024 5:52 PM

Where was Kate?

by Anonymousreply 514March 31, 2024 6:05 PM

His bottom teeth are appalling. Wow!

by Anonymousreply 515March 31, 2024 6:29 PM

He looks a hell of a lot better than Cams. I wonder if something is going on with her as well?

by Anonymousreply 516March 31, 2024 7:29 PM

R512 If it's pancreatic, then very unlikely he'll see next Easter.

by Anonymousreply 517March 31, 2024 7:44 PM

R516, I think something has been going on with Camilla for many years. Whatever it is, they've got it mostly managed, but she's definitely got something going.

by Anonymousreply 518March 31, 2024 9:21 PM

R518 Queen Camilla is almost 78, I'm sure she's got a number of medical issues. The most prominent rumour, however, is that she has bad arthritis and reoccurring back problems.

The fact that Charles was out and about today and meeting people in the crowd suggests to me that things aren't as dire as the rumour mill is suggesting.

by Anonymousreply 519March 31, 2024 9:36 PM

I think Charles looks well. Hopefully the rumours that the cancer is pancreatic are untrue.

by Anonymousreply 520March 31, 2024 11:18 PM

I thought he looked a bit peaked and tired, but otherwise very good. In fine form, actually. Looking forward to seeing him hopefully at Trooping the Colour and other events this spring.

by Anonymousreply 521March 31, 2024 11:21 PM

So 75 year old Charles stricken with cancer can muster up the energy to show up for Easter service but Kate couldn’t? Lazy bitch.

by Anonymousreply 522March 31, 2024 11:33 PM

R522 Which led to believe that Kate’s cancer is more serious.

by Anonymousreply 523March 31, 2024 11:34 PM

[quote]Do you think it could be something in the Royal palaces causing cancer?

Charlotte is poisoning them.

by Anonymousreply 524March 31, 2024 11:45 PM

Or her chemo is more recent, so her risk of infection is higher.

by Anonymousreply 525April 1, 2024 12:18 AM

Or she and the family are spending the Easter break at their house in Norfolk, as already announced.

by Anonymousreply 526April 1, 2024 12:37 AM

R522 is incredibly stupid.

by Anonymousreply 527April 1, 2024 11:36 AM

Ruth Bader Ginsburg lived for 11 years after being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, and the diagnosis itself surely came a fair while after the cancer had started to develop.

The only reason garbage fiction like In Touch Weekly is saying it's pancreatic cancer is because they know that will create more of a stir, as evidenced from some of the gullible here.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 528April 1, 2024 11:47 AM

Are they bots or the stupid class?

by Anonymousreply 529April 1, 2024 12:03 PM

RBG's cancer was caught in early stage and was the rare and much more treatable type. Guitarist Wilco Johnson was also diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, given 6 months, but another specialist found he had the rarer kind that was treatable, he loved another 10 years. But the treatable type will longer survival rates is like 2%.

by Anonymousreply 530April 1, 2024 12:37 PM

So, to be clear, we've now decided as accepted fact that Charles has pancreatic cancer and Kate has ovarian cancer? I just don't want to derail the conversation going forward. TIA!

by Anonymousreply 531April 1, 2024 12:41 PM

We are basically assuming the article's claim that King Charles has pancreatic cancer is accurate.

by Anonymousreply 532April 1, 2024 12:51 PM

And can I ask why we're making that assumption?

by Anonymousreply 533April 1, 2024 12:53 PM

What article - In Touch Weekly or Glamour?

by Anonymousreply 534April 1, 2024 12:54 PM

None of us have any idea WTF type of cancer either Charles or Kate has. All we know is about Charles's is that it was discovered during treatment for an enlarged prostate, and that according to the prime minister, it was caught early. All we know about Kate's is that it was discovered during tests after abdominal surgery. No credible source has confirmed anything other than that.

by Anonymousreply 535April 1, 2024 1:31 PM

I keep thinking it's bladder cancer.

by Anonymousreply 536April 1, 2024 1:49 PM

We really don't need to know, in either case. The Queen Mother had bowel cancer about halfway through her life, and it was kinda known but barely remarked on, back in those gentler times. We did not know what QEII was dying of until well after she went, and it was none of our business. We could see she was weakening, and we seemed to be content with that.

Charles and Kate are undergoing chemo, which is rough on most people, especially post-operatively, so of course they feel sick. Once that's over, if they're back doing their duties that's all that matters. Thanks to the marvels of the internet and the 24-hour news cycle, we will know if one of them starts to fail by using our eyes. We don't need to know what odds they've got: even for DL that's a graceless expectation.

by Anonymousreply 537April 1, 2024 2:03 PM

Typically when a urologist is doing scanning for prostate they tend to include the entire abdominal region, since prostate disease can also impact other organs . If any irregularities or obvious signs of tumors are evidenced in the imaging, that can be included in the test results. This would include the bladder, the kidneys, the liver, and pancreas and gallbladder.

by Anonymousreply 538April 1, 2024 7:07 PM

The handbag is so-so, but I really like the rest of Anne's outfit from yesterday

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 539April 1, 2024 9:27 PM

Just saw the dress matches the coat, very nice. She has kept her figure very well.

by Anonymousreply 540April 1, 2024 10:07 PM

I don’t like the boots, she should have worn smart brown suede pumps.

by Anonymousreply 541April 2, 2024 4:00 AM

R537 Charles undergoing chemo is conjecture which has been picked up and run with on the internet. He could well be going through radiotherapy.

by Anonymousreply 542April 2, 2024 4:27 AM

No pumps for the Princess Royal, R541,. One never know when one might need to commandeer a mighty steed.

by Anonymousreply 543April 2, 2024 4:33 AM

R538, it's very hard to see the pancreas on screening, unless you do an MRI. Unlikely you'd spot a problem on an ordinary ultrasound, or even a CT without contrast, if you were just doing a sweep of the area.

That's a key reason why pancreatic cancer is so often not picked up early. There's no easy way to have a look.

by Anonymousreply 544April 2, 2024 12:40 PM

Anne fucking rules, and I wish she could.

Kate does look pretty bad. Chuck...not so bad, especially considering he's not a spring chicken. That said, who the fuck knows? A lucky break here, a not so lucky break there, it's really something of a crapshoot.

An aside: Am I the only one who feels odd when they hear/read "Queen Camilla"? I'm not even that invested in the BaRF, but it just feels like a parallel universe or something. Why YES, I would LOVE another G&T!

by Anonymousreply 545April 2, 2024 11:25 PM

Is Charles being treated in London? Why the helicopter trips for treatment?

by Anonymousreply 546April 2, 2024 11:40 PM

The helicopter trips are because he is reportedly staying at his house in Norfolk.

by Anonymousreply 547April 2, 2024 11:57 PM

You mean Sandringham, where British Kings go to be euthanized,?

by Anonymousreply 548April 3, 2024 12:30 AM

No, R548, I meant Norfolk, which is the English county in which the Sandringham estate including Sandringham House is located.

Just a tip - it’s always wise to get one’s facts straight before attempting to correct someone else.

Idiot.

by Anonymousreply 549April 3, 2024 1:42 AM

Damn, people are really touchy in this thread.

by Anonymousreply 550April 3, 2024 2:08 AM

Not at all R550, but if someone corrects me - incorrectly - then I am happy to correct them.

by Anonymousreply 551April 3, 2024 2:26 AM

r549, your cuntiness has been noted.

R548, me asked a question?

But as you are being so obtuse, where in Norfolk did Chuck go if not Sandringham?

by Anonymousreply 552April 3, 2024 11:06 AM

"Anne fucking rules, and I wish she could." - What do you wish she could "rule", r545.

No, it's not at all odd to hear/read "Queen Camilla". Succession is a system that's existed for a 1000 years, it's entirely normal for there to be a new king and queen when the old ones die.

by Anonymousreply 553April 3, 2024 4:22 PM

R553 Settle down, Beavis.

by Anonymousreply 554April 3, 2024 7:36 PM

Sky News.- King Charles could attend more engagements soon in what could be positive cancer signal.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 555April 9, 2024 11:43 PM

The phrase "Queen Camilla" doesn't really throw me, but hearing Camilla referred to as THE Queen still feels a bit strange. I'm guessing people had the same reaction when Queen Victoria died and Alexandra became Queen.

I think Charles looks pretty healthy in the recent footage we've seen of him, including R555's video of him with the stamps. Obviously you can't necessarily gauge someone's health just by looking at them, but at least there are no red flags. Hopefully he's responding well to treatment.

by Anonymousreply 556April 10, 2024 12:16 AM

He has pasty cancer look to this visage IMO. Seen it many times. Charles' complexion used to be quite ruddy. He might be wearing makeup or it's cancer pallor.

by Anonymousreply 557April 10, 2024 2:29 AM

At R539, Anne's gloves, bag, and boots all look awful, IMO.

Her hat has a black puff ball and black feathers, so she should have stuck with black gloves, bag, and footwear.

The boots with the fringe look like something from the '70s.

The bag looks deflated and like something you see at a thrift store.

But yes, her figure looks great and the coat dress is nice.

by Anonymousreply 558April 10, 2024 3:06 AM

I thought Charles look a bit tired, but actually very good otherwise in recent appearances. He's definitely lost a little weight, but that's not a bad thing. He looked trim in a good way, lost his small paunch and his fingers looked a bit better -? Not as puffy.

He's always seemed hale and hearty and unless they're covering up negative details, he should be back on normal schedule by years end. This monarchy seems high on transparency, so I don't think they're hiding anything from the public.

by Anonymousreply 559April 10, 2024 2:34 PM

I saw a press photo of Charles looking at his new banknotes, and thought his right hand looked even more prosthesis-like. The puffiness and redness contrasted yet more with his new pallor and weight loss.

It's admirable though that Charles is making sure to be seen as an active presence. I hope he continues steadily to make a full recovery.

by Anonymousreply 560April 10, 2024 3:15 PM

[quote] I hope he continues steadily to make a full recovery.

He will be the first sovereign since G3 that hasn't been sent off direct to the knackers.

by Anonymousreply 561April 10, 2024 3:56 PM
Loading
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!