|
Post by suite583 on Jul 13, 2011 14:26:41 GMT -5
A poster on Eringer is reporting that Albert and Charlene are in Corsica not SA. Saint Devote came from Corsica.
|
|
|
Post by countess on Jul 13, 2011 15:21:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mrplowfan on Jul 13, 2011 15:27:56 GMT -5
But to the sugars, this is all okay. Love is apparently a victorian notion now that the gig is up. This is the best they can do?! *gag* I quote: "if they married for love thats great if they didnt thats fine as well marriage for thousands of years had nothing to do with love. getting married for love is a victorian era invention. if they like each other and have made an agreement that she produces an heir and then is taken care of financially. helps to raise the child but is free to live her own life i see nothing wrong with it royals have done this before its nothing new." My response:WTF? Did any of you marry to be a brood mare only? Did any of you marry to be taken care of financially? Hell, I don't recall a relationship (and yes, I remember the 60s) where I wasn't in love with the guy. I still loved my husband when we divorced - I just wasn't in love with the idea that he thought nothing of having a woman or two on the side. Has something changed in the last 30 years? When did it become acceptable and expected NOT to marry for love?! PS someone tell me there are not other sugar boards saying the same thing. I only know of that one and one other.
|
|
|
Post by Elektra on Jul 13, 2011 15:32:28 GMT -5
Since they and their wedding of the (now true) century became the laughing stock of the world they should make the best out of it. Create the Princess Charlène awards of soap opera. I bet it would be a hit - moneywise and attentionwise. Would show to the world that PA had at least some humor and sovereignty.
|
|
|
Post by suite583 on Jul 13, 2011 15:56:09 GMT -5
It is also odd they are not honeymooning one month, for they will return July 20th, next Wednesday.
|
|
|
Post by emmeline on Jul 13, 2011 16:02:16 GMT -5
Oh, in the sugars board, they desperate to try to keep the morons' image good. They are saying that this was annunced since last year, that wasn't going to be the honeymoon, that was going to be the IOC meeting, so it's perfectly understandable for the morons to sleep in separate rooms...LMAO. ALSO, as they are aware that the Grimaldis are called trashy family, and that Charlene herself is the biggest trash in the family right now, they have to come up with things like this:
that camilla is trashier, that charles is trashier, because he called camilla that he wanted to be his tampax, that sarah is trashier, etc...now all of that has been deleted:
Please that off topic posts about the the world's trashiest royal families, the antics of Charles/Diana/Camilla, discussion about the agendas of Nicole and Tamara, as well as birth control pills --- its effectiveness, etc. have been deleted.
Let's get back on topic with General News and Information about Albert and Charlene (not everyone else).
Any and all additional posts will be deleted without notice
Also, the same sugar loonie has post this like a day ago, to defend her idol trashlene:
"And, what are the bona fides of Camilla, who will be queen of England?? Or of Princess Caroline or the very, respectable, Stephanie?? What are Charlotte's big accomplishments??? Sophie of Wessex, she worked at one time, but now cuts ribbons. Actually, Elizabeth of England, never went to college, either. Learned on the job."
Imagine! Compare the Queen to Trashy!! LOL It's incredible. How can this idiot compare QEII, who by the way she was made Queen very young, and has learnt on the job because she had to! And, it were different times! But no, anything is good to try to save their trashy idol image.
|
|
|
Post by countess on Jul 13, 2011 16:04:36 GMT -5
abcnews.go.com/International/prince-albert-monaco-charlene-wittstock-slept-honeymoon-palace/story?id=14061328MORE! ;D ;D well they wanted to famous in the states....infamous more like it The couple is also under siege (siege i like the sound of that)from the French press, questioning whether their wedding was a sham, a secret (not anymore, now sane people knows the goldigger is renting her uterus out) deal to allow Wittstock a lavish, royal lifestyle and produce a legitimate heir to the throne for Albert.
"You have to consider why they've gone through with what looks like a pretty painful event," said the Daily Sun's Allen. "And in the end the speculation is all that the reason for the marriage is to produce this heir, that they will do all they can to produce this heir and then we will see what happens."
The formal body language and tepid affection displayed by the royals on their honeymoon matches what was seen at the couple's royal wedding in Monaco.
Wittstock was in tears throughout the wedding ceremony, while her husband looked on, and Prince Albert had to formally ask his bride for a kiss, a request caught on camera for the world to see.
Royal watchers commented Her Serene Highness Princess Charlene, as Wittstock is now formally known, looked more like "Her Miserable Highness ;D ;D than a blushing new bride.
the Palace says the couple has now headed off on a "secret" honeymoon where they will not be under the watchful eyes of the media, and skeptics.like i'm going to believe anything the flying monkey flunkies say. OH OH if the IVF does work, the headlines will be " THEY slept apart, so WHO IS THE FATHER!!!)
|
|
|
Post by hibou on Jul 13, 2011 17:07:55 GMT -5
But to the sugars, this is all okay. Love is apparently a victorian notion now that the gig is up. This is the best they can do?! *gag* I quote: "if they married for love thats great if they didnt thats fine as well marriage for thousands of years had nothing to do with love. getting married for love is a victorian era invention. if they like each other and have made an agreement that she produces an heir and then is taken care of financially. helps to raise the child but is free to live her own life i see nothing wrong with it royals have done this before its nothing new." My response:WTF? Did any of you marry to be a brood mare only? Did any of you marry to be taken care of financially? Hell, I don't recall a relationship (and yes, I remember the 60s) where I wasn't in love with the guy. I still loved my husband when we divorced - I just wasn't in love with the idea that he thought nothing of having a woman or two on the side. Has something changed in the last 30 years? When did it become acceptable and expected NOT to marry for love?! PS someone tell me there are not other sugar boards saying the same thing. I only know of that one and one other. Pre-1900 ( that makes it the Victorian era) when the only jobs a "decent" woman could get were, cook, maid, and if educated - nanny or Governess. One was considered an old maid by 20 too. Also women were considered property more or less. A woman's job was to "marry up" to improve her financial situation. Jane Austin anyone? However our big mistake with the sugar boarders is that we assumed everyone is functioning in the 21st century. Apparently they need to catch up in time. Thankfully the women's movement took place starting with the right to vote and then progressed to fighting the glass ceiling. We still have a ways to go. As women gained their financial independence they did not need to marry, hence they only married for love. I am proud to say that I had many great Aunts who did not marry unless it was for love. I had one Aunt who read the Wall St Journal well into her 90's. She never married. She became financially independent. They ran a ladies hat shop in Palm Beach and the then fashionable Jersey shore. The price they sold their hats for is today's equivalent of $1,000 a hat and back then hats were a necessity. Any way, we are fortunate to be able to marry for love not necessity, and there in lies the difference between us and the sugar boarders they still think it's ok to marry for the cash and the social position. I guess their thinking is that it's better to be miserable by a pool with a butler and all the perks, than to marry for love. As Dolly said in the musical "Hello Dolly", "why don't you just snuggle up to your cash register". JMO
|
|
|
Post by paca on Jul 13, 2011 17:43:36 GMT -5
Oh, in the sugars board, they desperate to try to keep the morons' image good. They are saying that this was annunced since last year, that wasn't going to be the honeymoon, that was going to be the IOC meeting, so it's perfectly understandable for the morons to sleep in separate rooms...LMAO. ALSO, as they are aware that the Grimaldis are called trashy family, and that Charlene herself is the biggest trash in the family right now, they have to come up with things like this: that camilla is trashier, that charles is trashier, because he called camilla that he wanted to be his tampax, that sarah is trashier, etc...now all of that has been deleted: Please that off topic posts about the the world's trashiest royal families, the antics of Charles/Diana/Camilla, discussion about the agendas of Nicole and Tamara, as well as birth control pills --- its effectiveness, etc. have been deleted.
Let's get back on topic with General News and Information about Albert and Charlene (not everyone else).
Any and all additional posts will be deleted without noticeAlso, the same sugar loonie has post this like a day ago, to defend her idol trashlene: "And, what are the bona fides of Camilla, who will be queen of England?? Or of Princess Caroline or the very, respectable, Stephanie?? What are Charlotte's big accomplishments??? Sophie of Wessex, she worked at one time, but now cuts ribbons. Actually, Elizabeth of England, never went to college, either. Learned on the job." Imagine! Compare the Queen to Trashy!! LOL It's incredible. How can this idiot compare QEII, who by the way she was made Queen very young, and has learnt on the job because she had to! And, it were different times! But no, anything is good to try to save their trashy idol image. LOL actually QEII did train for a job during WWII: she trained as a mechanic, a very unwomanly job and especially in her time.
|
|
|
Post by scout on Jul 13, 2011 19:35:43 GMT -5
The loonies need to tell the whole story about not marrying for love, but they seem to thrive on half-truths and whole lies.
If someone like Albert married and it wasn't for love, then it would be for the purpose of strengthening his country in some way. Like when Henry VIII married his first wife, Catherine, it was to strengthen ties between England and Spain. What purpose could he have to marry Charlene? What does she bring to the marriage that helps Monaco in any way? She has no money, ties to South Africa don't seem that important to Monaco, she has no prestige. No one knew of Charlene until she became Albert's mistress. They said she was to be the flagship, but if Albert was not going to marry for love, I think that there had to be millions of women that are more attractive and would be more helpful to Monaco than Charlene ever will. Charlene doesn't care about Monaco! She cannot even be bothered to learn the language. If he wasn't going to marry for love, why didn't he pick someone who knew something about running a country?
The ONLY way that this marriage works in any sensible way is if these two fools are in love. Since they have shown us that they can barely stand each other, then the conclusion is that they mocked marriage for the purpose of producing an heir. How sleazy is that, particularly when Rainier provided for heirs after Albert so there is no crucial need for these two fools to have a child unless they are in love and would love the child.
Just a mockery!
|
|
cstone
Junior Member
Posts: 91
|
Post by cstone on Jul 13, 2011 20:32:02 GMT -5
what's happening now? Are they together? And if not this should down in history as the shortest royal marrage
|
|
|
Post by donna on Jul 14, 2011 3:50:19 GMT -5
It is also odd they are not honeymooning one month, for they will return July 20th, next Wednesday. Any idea when the red cross ball in on this year? Or will they drop it?
|
|
|
Post by donna on Jul 14, 2011 4:47:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hibou on Jul 14, 2011 7:15:45 GMT -5
Some one needs to correct the media that Albert absolutely does not need to produce and heir since Caroline is next in line and has produced 4 heirs. This is the only lame excuse the palace PR can come up with, but some one needs to tell the media that too is a shame. JMO
|
|
cstone
Junior Member
Posts: 91
|
Post by cstone on Jul 14, 2011 7:36:30 GMT -5
For all those sugars out the just gribs with the idea that people do marry for love-will and kate,victoria and daniel and a lot of us married for love-in victorian era love didn't play into anything moat of the marriages was base on social climbing-so pls sugars do ur research before making statements ie read a book and all that was said with love
|
|
|
Post by axelle on Jul 14, 2011 7:56:50 GMT -5
It is also odd they are not honeymooning one month, for they will return July 20th, next Wednesday. Do we know for sure they will surface in Moronaco next Weds the 20th?
|
|
|
Post by emmeline on Jul 14, 2011 10:35:05 GMT -5
It is also odd they are not honeymooning one month, for they will return July 20th, next Wednesday. Any idea when the red cross ball in on this year? Or will they drop it? Thanks to Antoinette (rip) she missed the Rose Ball. I don't think she will be prepared to miss another big Ball, this time the Red Cross
|
|
|
Post by bettina on Jul 14, 2011 11:34:48 GMT -5
Red Cross Ball in on 31st of July, I thought it was always in August. Let's see how they will emerge on the 20th first. If and when the DNA results come, if positive, I think the only way they could turn this around would be for PA to issue ( from the palace balcony ) a public apology to the people of Monaco, his guests, the world who watched the wedding and his bride for insulting everyone and f...ing up so badly and beg to be forgiven and then take the snip. If the test/s come out negative, no one is going to believe it after all that went on. Looking back, when he said in his speech to Charlene thank you for put up my inconsistencies, he either meant it as his lies to her or his infidelities, just using a different word...
|
|
|
Post by suite583 on Jul 14, 2011 11:39:13 GMT -5
It is also odd they are not honeymooning one month, for they will return July 20th, next Wednesday. Do we know for sure they will surface in Moronaco next Weds the 20th? The palace announced they will be back on that day, that was my point.
|
|
|
Post by suite583 on Jul 14, 2011 11:41:40 GMT -5
It is also odd they are not honeymooning one month, for they will return July 20th, next Wednesday. Any idea when the red cross ball in on this year? Or will they drop it? I am expecting them on the red cross ball. But you never know....
|
|