It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No one sees the same thing? Princesses Diana?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 06:02 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I"m not seeing it.
Diana was in a loveless marriage with an unrepentant cheater.
Kate and William are in a love match and he's not being a cheat.
Diana was at odds with the royal family, the queen didn't like her.
All reports say Kate fits in just fine and the queen likes her.
Diana had two children and reports say she wanted to adopt a daughter.
Kate has one with one one the way. We don't know how many she wants.
Diana was VERY young and easily manipulated.
Kate is more mature and knows what she's doing.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.




posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Hmmm...

To be quite honest, I don't really care... The lady is going to have a baby and I am sure that dad and mum are going to be very proud and chuffed...

However, I would like to add that Kate and Pippa Middleton (her sister) have gorgeous bums and I would do them both in this order... Kate, Pippa, Pippa Kate... have a kebab after a couple of pints and why not both at the same time afterwards just to finish off the night... *cough cough cough*... Humour... Cripes I should stop reading Viz...

May they be blessed and may the kids have happy lives and parents that are not too screwed up by old fashioned Royal protocol issues which will screw up the kids lives in the long run...

Kindest respects

Rodinus

Ps. Kate... Pippa hi girls, you should both still have my mobile number...



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Diabolical

No will's and harry are not there father and weather they show it or not are secretly angry over the murder of there mother but can do nothing about it, I think this young lady is a nice girl and that there love is genuine even if like any young couple they argue now and then behind closed door's, they are a normal couple both of similar age unlike Charles and Dianna (and I do not think charles had anything to do with her murder though he was a cad to her though I do believe over members of the family and those behind them did but pointing no fingers).
I actually think they will live a long and happy (mostly) life as far as being bird's in a gilded cage will allow them too, remember the queen herself once snuck out in disguise to go walking around london and it caused a furure after which they even tried to say she was a little crazy but it was more about the fact they are puppets in control of next to nothing but necessary for the status quo to operate in the british hierarchical system of social governance.
It will not end the same, William would never stand for that and Kate has her own mind and is no one's puppet except for him though she does have to fit in and do as they tell her.

Off the cuff the best looking one was her unknown cousin who worked as a stripper or should I say burlesque dancer (it sounds far more respectable than a reverse painter and decorator does it not) www.deviantart.com... , she shamelessly capitalized on her previously unknown royal connection but who can blame her and she was a rather good looking girl as well.
edit on 9-9-2014 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Diabolical
Something says, we will hear about Kate, who has 2 children in 12 months time? I never heard of it. I like her, but she is ending up like Diana. I don't have to see the truth, to see where this is going. Kate will suffer. And sadly, it was her choice of men. Kate seems so much like Diana, it won't end well for her. Hopefully it will.


You are a Futurist.

Look to history for your Validation, there is a clear definable path of sacrifices for you to follow,many times when a new impactfull DNA is injected into the Royal gene-pool the Queen Mothers are sacrificed.

Look to the FAMILY HISTORIES OF THESE WOMEN for your answers,not to the Royal Family,look for what the BLUEBLOODS WANT TO ADD.And why?



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Diabolical
Something says, we will hear about Kate, who has 2 children in 12 months time? I never heard of it. I like her, but she is ending up like Diana. I don't have to see the truth, to see where this is going. Kate will suffer. And sadly, it was her choice of men. Kate seems so much like Diana, it won't end well for her. Hopefully it will.


You are a Futurist.

Look to history for your Validation, there is a clear definable path of sacrifices for you to follow,many times when a new impactfull DNA is injected into the Royal gene-pool the Queen Mothers are sacrificed.

Look to the FAMILY HISTORIES OF THESE WOMEN for your answers,not to the Royal Family,look for what the BLUEBLOODS WANT TO ADD.And why?




It is called being in love... Sleeping together and making babies...

Full stop.

Kindest respects

Rodinus



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: Diabolical

I so see yet another anorexic or over active thyroid young woman who is painfully thin, but very bubbly.



What planet are you from that Kate Middleton is considered painfully thin or anorexic?

Basically, you're implying that any woman who takes care of her body and isn't chunky must be starving herself or victim of a medical disorder. Haters gonna hate, I suppose.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: one4all

Look to history for your Validation, there is a clear definable path of sacrifices for you to follow,many times when a new impactfull DNA is injected into the Royal gene-pool the Queen Mothers are sacrificed.

Look to the FAMILY HISTORIES OF THESE WOMEN for your answers,not to the Royal Family,look for what the BLUEBLOODS WANT TO ADD.And why?




How about backing that up with evidence. What Queen Mother is going to be sacrificed now? There currently is none. The last Queen Mother was Elizabeth II's mother. Queen Mother refers to the mother of the Queen who was, in her own right, a queen whether consort or reigning.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I believe the term is: "An heir and a spare..."

Nothing to odd about it to me?



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: one4all

Look to history for your Validation, there is a clear definable path of sacrifices for you to follow,many times when a new impactfull DNA is injected into the Royal gene-pool the Queen Mothers are sacrificed.

Look to the FAMILY HISTORIES OF THESE WOMEN for your answers,not to the Royal Family,look for what the BLUEBLOODS WANT TO ADD.And why?




How about backing that up with evidence. What Queen Mother is going to be sacrificed now? There currently is none. The last Queen Mother was Elizabeth II's mother. Queen Mother refers to the mother of the Queen who was, in her own right, a queen whether consort or reigning.




Have you ever heard of Catherine Howard? Or Anne Boleyn? Or Diana Spencer?




edit on 9-9-2014 by one4all because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: one4all

Look to history for your Validation, there is a clear definable path of sacrifices for you to follow,many times when a new impactfull DNA is injected into the Royal gene-pool the Queen Mothers are sacrificed.

Look to the FAMILY HISTORIES OF THESE WOMEN for your answers,not to the Royal Family,look for what the BLUEBLOODS WANT TO ADD.And why?





How about backing that up with evidence. What Queen Mother is going to be sacrificed now? There currently is none. The last Queen Mother was Elizabeth II's mother. Queen Mother refers to the mother of the Queen who was, in her own right, a queen whether consort or reigning.




Have you ever heard of Catherine Howard? Or Anne Boleyn? Or Diana Spencer?





I certainly have. Which one of those was a Queen Mother? You apparently don't understand that a Queen Mother is a) a woman who was either a reigning queen or a queen consort and is also b) the mother of a monarch. The title Queen Mother does NOT refer to someone who is simply a queen and a mother. Elizabeth II is not a Queen Mother. Her mother was Queen Mother because a) she was a queen in her own right and b) she was the mother of a monarch during her lifetime.

Of which monarch was Catherine Howard the mother during her lifetime? None. She was not a Queen Mother.
Of which monarch was Anne Boleyn the mother during her lifetime? None. She was not a Queen Mother.
When was Diana Spencer a queen? Never. She was not a Queen or a Queen Mother.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Diabolical
a reply to: KingIcarus

Yes, a hunch. Saying it now. She's not safe. I don't know the royal family. But she is not safe. Kate and Diana are alike.



Oh and look! There goes a bunny rabbit with horns and fangs running across the yard being chased by the Batmobile!



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: Diabolical

I so see yet another anorexic or over active thyroid young woman who is painfully thin, but very bubbly.



What planet are you from that Kate Middleton is considered painfully thin or anorexic?

Basically, you're implying that any woman who takes care of her body and isn't chunky must be starving herself or victim of a medical disorder. Haters gonna hate, I suppose.


I agree and i think she looks very healthy too! if she was anorexic and sickly thin then she wouldn't have beautiful skin & hair like she does! us women can't win with the whole body image thing!
edit on 9-9-2014 by Shana91aus because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Diabolical
a reply to: KingIcarus

Yes, a hunch. Saying it now. She's not safe. I don't know the royal family. But she is not safe. Kate and Diana are alike.


Nope, Kate isn't married to Charles.

Kate is pretty savvy, I think she wouldn't have been named Waity-Katie if she weren't.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: one4all

Look to history for your Validation, there is a clear definable path of sacrifices for you to follow,many times when a new impactfull DNA is injected into the Royal gene-pool the Queen Mothers are sacrificed.

Look to the FAMILY HISTORIES OF THESE WOMEN for your answers,not to the Royal Family,look for what the BLUEBLOODS WANT TO ADD.And why?





How about backing that up with evidence. What Queen Mother is going to be sacrificed now? There currently is none. The last Queen Mother was Elizabeth II's mother. Queen Mother refers to the mother of the Queen who was, in her own right, a queen whether consort or reigning.




Have you ever heard of Catherine Howard? Or Anne Boleyn? Or Diana Spencer?





I certainly have. Which one of those was a Queen Mother? You apparently don't understand that a Queen Mother is a) a woman who was either a reigning queen or a queen consort and is also b) the mother of a monarch. The title Queen Mother does NOT refer to someone who is simply a queen and a mother. Elizabeth II is not a Queen Mother. Her mother was Queen Mother because a) she was a queen in her own right and b) she was the mother of a monarch during her lifetime.

Of which monarch was Catherine Howard the mother during her lifetime? None. She was not a Queen Mother.
Of which monarch was Anne Boleyn the mother during her lifetime? None. She was not a Queen Mother.
When was Diana Spencer a queen? Never. She was not a Queen or a Queen Mother.



Ok Ok your Queens win,ha ha ha, my main thrust was that women who marry into the Royal Family often find themselves dead under interesting circumstances,several have been Queens,and neither you nor I know how many times any of these women were Mothers,only DNA will tell us that,ha ha ha.Diana was part of the Royal Family who could have been Queen,Kate has the chance to be Queen if Willliam takes over for Charles,unless the Queen outlives them both.

I think the official geneological records of the Royal Family were DESTROYED at one point in history ,meaning DNA is the ONLY way to prove lineage.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 10:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Diabolical

If she doesn't attempt to marry into the same family Di was about to, she oughtta be fine.



posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 12:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: one4all

Look to history for your Validation, there is a clear definable path of sacrifices for you to follow,many times when a new impactfull DNA is injected into the Royal gene-pool the Queen Mothers are sacrificed.

Look to the FAMILY HISTORIES OF THESE WOMEN for your answers,not to the Royal Family,look for what the BLUEBLOODS WANT TO ADD.And why?





How about backing that up with evidence. What Queen Mother is going to be sacrificed now? There currently is none. The last Queen Mother was Elizabeth II's mother. Queen Mother refers to the mother of the Queen who was, in her own right, a queen whether consort or reigning.




Have you ever heard of Catherine Howard? Or Anne Boleyn? Or Diana Spencer?





I certainly have. Which one of those was a Queen Mother? You apparently don't understand that a Queen Mother is a) a woman who was either a reigning queen or a queen consort and is also b) the mother of a monarch. The title Queen Mother does NOT refer to someone who is simply a queen and a mother. Elizabeth II is not a Queen Mother. Her mother was Queen Mother because a) she was a queen in her own right and b) she was the mother of a monarch during her lifetime.

Of which monarch was Catherine Howard the mother during her lifetime? None. She was not a Queen Mother.
Of which monarch was Anne Boleyn the mother during her lifetime? None. She was not a Queen Mother.
When was Diana Spencer a queen? Never. She was not a Queen or a Queen Mother.



Ok Ok your Queens win,ha ha ha, my main thrust was that women who marry into the Royal Family often find themselves dead under interesting circumstances,several have been Queens,and neither you nor I know how many times any of these women were Mothers,only DNA will tell us that,ha ha ha.Diana was part of the Royal Family who could have been Queen,Kate has the chance to be Queen if Willliam takes over for Charles,unless the Queen outlives them both.

I think the official geneological records of the Royal Family were DESTROYED at one point in history ,meaning DNA is the ONLY way to prove lineage.



The current royal family is the House of Windsor. Your post was about Queen Mothers and I think I've made it clear that none of those killed were Queen Mothers and Diana wasn't even a Queen. Catherine Howard and Ann Boleyn lived-- and wre killed--hundreds of years ago. Katherine isn't Queen, won't be for a long time, and isn't dead. The Queen Mother lived to be well over 100 and wasn't killed. Sarah Ferguson isn't dead. Sophie isn't dead. Only one woman who married into the House of Windsor died a violent death and there is no evidence that Diana was murdered.

I don't know where you're going with your claim that the official geneological records of the royal family were destroyed. Where is your evidence that that happened? Of course DNA is the only way to absolutely prove lineage. Whose lineage is in question? Charles? William? George?

Where are you going with these two conspiracy theories?



posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 02:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Shana91aus
Yeah, its not unusual to have kids close in age... mine are a year and three days apart.



posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 02:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: scubagravy
As long as she doesn't cheat on Will with an Arab, all should be OK.

No, it's as long as he doesn't cheat on her with an old lady, wanting to "live in her trousers".



posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 05:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Adaluncatif

originally posted by: scubagravy
As long as she doesn't cheat on Will with an Arab, all should be OK.

No, it's as long as he doesn't cheat on her with an old lady, wanting to "live in her trousers".


Camilla is about Charles' age and a vastly more appropriate mate than Diana for a number of reasons. His misfortune (and, ultimately, Diana's) was marrying someone too young, too unlike him, and unsuited to "the life". Having to select from among a very small pool of appropriate women (right bloodline and aristocratic background, a virgin, scandal-free past, acceptable to the monarch etc.), he selected Diana. Essentially, he was forced into it. Yes, I know he could have defied the Monarch, left England and moved to Florida and raised alligators and been responsible for the collapse of the monarchy, but he has a sense of duty so he did that which he was supposed to do. If the monarch would have allowed him to marry Camilla the first time, he would have.

Someone will inevitably pounce on me for suggesting that Charles giving up the throne would collapse the monarchy but it would likely do just that. One person doing that per century is about all the monarchy can handle without being dumped by the public. After all, the monarch is supposed to be divinely chosen. Once that illusion is shattered, the tent collapses.

As for your reference to what should have been a private telephone conversation between lovers, don't you think their privacy was invaded?

The British aristocracy has always had rules about marital dalliances that are understood by everyone. Both married men and married women are allowed discreet dalliances. Considering that Diana grew up in the aristocracy, I find it impossible to believe that she was unaware of this tradition. I also find it impossible to believe that she didn't know that she was selected for a specific role: mother of a future king and spare and that love was not part of the deal. IF she was truly miraculously kept in a cotton candy cocoon of unawareness of that until the age of 20, her mother and father are to blame. Surely, they should have made her aware of her role-to-be. By all accounts, she was aware of Charles' and Camilla's ongoing relationship and discussed it with her sister shortly before the wedding.

None of this means that I didn't feel compassion for her predicament, but I also felt for his predicament. People tend to forget that he didn't grow up in anything remotely resembling the world the rest of us grew up in and he doesn't get to make the choices we take for granted. He's hardly a monster and neither is Camilla. Comments about her looks are especially offensive. Neither has done anything that isn't acceptable in the aristocracy. I guess they had the bad luck to fall in love while too young too marry, remained in love throughout their lives and only after each had been married and divorced finally allowed by the monarch to marry. They seem to be soul mates. Perhaps we should be happy for them at the same time we are sad about what happened to Diana.



posted on Sep, 10 2014 @ 05:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

The concept of royalty is so outmoded that the majority of countries don't have a 'family' living off the riches of the land and the people. Its defunct because they serve no real governing purpose except queenie can veto whatever she likes and its shut down. I suspect she would like to use her veto on loosing the scottish finances towards her yearly allowance from the public purse.

I am surprised you need to ask what's wrong with charlie and camilla - diana is whats wrong with charlie and camilly! She will never go away and serves as the best example of the establishment's true level it will sink to to protect itself and its loves in this country.

I suspect Charles could well be the last monarch if he ever gets to sit on the throne. However it begs the fact that currently we are supporting one of the wealthiest women in the worlds 4 generations of family.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join