It take two to tango. Charles is as much to blame, he was Diana's husband.
Thanks @LadyMuck
Transcription of Tom Bower
Discussion with Tom Bower on a Channel 4 documentary about Harald's relationship with Camilla. We have some information but TB said there's more to come and he's not yet watched it.
TB says that Camilla was responsible for the breakdown of Charles and Diana's marriage, she humiliated Diana whenever she met her, and was present during C and D's honeymoon with phone calls. Diana was treated appallingly, and when she died and Charles and Camilla openly resumed their relationship William and Harry were appalled.
There is more to come about how Camilla treated Charles's sons, lots to discover.
Whether the documentary will take it any furtherTB doesn't know, but he did write in his book that the conversation about the colour of Farkk's skin was held at Clarence House between Charles, Camilla and Harald, and it was not a critical conversation.
Harald loathes Camilla and believes she destroyed his parents' marriage.
The boys were heartbroken at how their mother was treated and cast aside, and must have gone through hell when she died.
The presenter said he completely understood Harald's animosity, but Camilla had won people over.
Tom Bower said the Stoat needs to move on, and has done enormous damage to Britain and the Monarchy.
Is there a way forward, a possible reconciliation? Tom said No.
The Jamaica trip was provocative, worse because when William and Catherine visited recently they were humiliated by the Jamaican PM.
Our relationship with the Caribbean is critical especially with the slavery issue, and now Meghan is posing as a champion of diversity.
The Sussexes went there to stir up trouble, and they capitalise constantly on their royal status.
Is it time for KC to remove their titles? Tom Bower says Chuck feels far too guilty about Camilla to do it.
I don't want William to mend fences. I don't want the Traitor Spare anywhere near William and Kate or the UK.I'm pleased that at last the actual story is coming out....
Chuck and Camilla's behaviour was atrocious. Enough to send any young wife round the bend and make her very ill.
Diana needed a husband who cared enough to understand her and be her trustworthy helpmeet as much as she wanted to be for him. Every wife and, one hopes, husband at the altar expects that. That's the deal, pledged legally and religiously.
But Chuck was too busy and preoccupied one way and another to be a genuine participant in the marriage.
"Whatever in love means" is a phrase that'll follow him throughout history. To my mind what Chuck and Camilla did is up there with what David and Wallis did in terms of damaging the Monarchy. Chuck, though, got his cake and is eating it, it's turned out to be a sour feast.
Deception always has consequences. Here, Haz's acting out behaviour is but one. Chuck is hoist by his own petard, "I am justly killed by mine own treachery." He's so awash with guilt that he can't do anything to remedy the damage which has spread far and wide.
It's a true Shakespearian tragedy.
I am pleased it's all being uncovered and discussed, albeit piecemeal, at last. The endless plotting and scheming and twisted narratives over the past 40-odd years have been mind-bending for everyone. Though it's truly tragic, at least we're able to put the pieces together more honestly and retrieve our manipulated minds!
I think Tom Bower's assessment is sound, though he rightly stops short of suggesting remedies. I'm not constrained by the same considerations as he is, so I can. An early abdication could achieve a semblance of peace, a truce even, and give the brothers an opportunity to begin to mend fences. As it is they're both trapped in a triangulation of deceits that they've both had to play along with for years which is a deeply corrosive situation. QED.
Thanks @LadyMuckThanks @peradetlic, and @LadyMuck for the fantastic title.
QUOTE="LadyMuck, post: 18157067, member: 59163"]
Tom Bower telling it how it is. Spot on!
Totally agree with you. I never bought into the Harold the ‘ cheeky chappy‘ scenario either . I always thought he was an attention seeking Show off .I am the least likely person to say "I told you so" mostly because I don't often trust my own instincts and have been proven wrong.
However, I have always loathed Harry. Never got the Princely love and most eligible batchelor shtick, I always though he was as ugly as sin and a buffoon. Bit Emperors new clothes....
Add to that his allegedly appalling and abusive treatment of his horses (Polo) and I couldn't abide him. Hated him in fact.
Since his repellent behaviour towards his family and marriage to that horrible woman, I have sadly be proven right.All royal titles should be removed asap. Why he is still allowed profit off them is mind boggling.
Or both!! I found this statement on the Tena Lady website...Perhaps she had her own toilet seat under that HUGE skirt...or perhaps she wore a TENA lady!![]()
Three... Diana was no angel eitherIt take two to tango. Charles is as much to blame, he was Diana's husband.
Just remember how Harry smiled at Charlotte at the funeral. And how she moved as far away from him as she could and got close as possible to her mother.More Harkle PR crap.
William - stubborn, angry.
Hazbeen - friendly
![]()
Kate Middleton’s Condition May Hasten Harry and Meghan Reconciliation, Friends Say
Friends of the royals say everyone is sick of the feud, and hope that Kate will urge stubborn, angry husband Prince William to reciprocate Prince Harry’s friendly overtures.www.thedailybeast.com
Ummm, would this be the same Haz who allowed his wife to insult Catherine? The same privacy-obsessed Haz who published text messages supposedly from Catherine in Waaagh? The same Haz who implied William only married Catherine because she 'fit the mould'. That Haz?
And, given Hazza's position in the polls versus William's, and the assorted polls wanting Haz's titles stripped/out of the Los, etc I doubt the public give a shit TBH.
That last sentence.
Sykes can do one.