Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Richard liveth yet

Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@...] wrote:

> Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
Tony Snow for
> comparison? Thankyou.

Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
didn't have such a bad hairdo...

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%22&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2


*shrugs*
Kat


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com

Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with Richard's hair.

Helen

Rogue <roguefem@...> wrote:

Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@...] wrote:

> Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
Tony Snow for
> comparison? Thankyou.

Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
didn't have such a bad hairdo...

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%22&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2

*shrugs*
Kat

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com






---------------------------------
Yahoo!7 Mail has just got even bigger and better with unlimited storage on all webmail accounts. Find out more.

--- In , Helen Rowe
<sweethelly2003@...> wrote:
>
> Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with
Richard's hair.
>
> Helen
>
> Rogue <roguefem@...> wrote:
>
> Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@...] wrote:
>
> > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> Tony Snow for
> > comparison? Thankyou.
>
> Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> didn't have such a bad hairdo...
>
>
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%22&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2
>


The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he didn't say
George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly surprised
that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than, say the
Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then set the
record straight re Richard.

Katy

Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family having their snouts in the trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past favours.? i have always believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists, with a great deal of help from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and could this spell the end of the monarchy??


-----Original Message-----
From: oregonkaty <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 3.04am
Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet






--- In , Helen Rowe
<sweethelly2003@...> wrote:
>
> Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with
Richard's hair.
>
> Helen
>
> Rogue <roguefem@...> wrote:
>
> Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@...] wrote:
>
> > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> Tony Snow for
> > comparison? Thankyou.
>
> Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> didn't have such a bad hairdo...
>
>
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%22&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2
>


The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he didn't say
George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly surprised
that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than, say the
Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then set the
record straight re Richard.

Katy





________________________________________________________________________
Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share and store photos and experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your favourite artists. Find out more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.

i doubt it, i think the monarchy will stand this glitch.
diana's sons are heir to the throne. charles won't be king for any length of time. his mother genetically has a good many years left.
diana descends from woodville, btw.
see:
http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=PED&db=wolfordsheppard&id=I069639

http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=PED&db=wolfordsheppard&id=I048294

then click on diana to access charles. from charles you can access camilla's ancestry. i've no idea how accurate the genealogies are in this gedcom, but there are lots of notes etc.

also..people need to remember camilla and charles have a very long history of being together. they knew the games of aristrocracy. when diana married into that horde, she fufilled her role..the heir and spare. royals have always had their daliances. camilla's grannie was a royal mistress too.

it is only middle class values that want to lay a bad boy judgement on charles. the upper crust has always played beyond the rules.

check wikipedia's write up on king james i, the fellow who gave us the kjv bible. he rode through the streets of london to chants of..elizabeth was king, james is queen. james really was an interesting person..definitely a "do as i say, not as i do" kind of person.

i kind of wonder about the gunpowder plot, was it supposed to add insult to injury? james' father, lord darnley's death involved a "gunpowder plot" too.

roslyn


Coralnelson11@... wrote:
Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family having their snouts in the trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past favours.? i have always believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists, with a great deal of help from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and could this spell the end of the monarchy??

-----Original Message-----
From: oregonkaty <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 3.04am
Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet

--- In , Helen Rowe
<sweethelly2003@...> wrote:
>
> Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with
Richard's hair.
>
> Helen
>
> Rogue <roguefem@...> wrote:
>
> Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@...] wrote:
>
> > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> Tony Snow for
> > comparison? Thankyou.
>
> Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> didn't have such a bad hairdo...
>
>
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%22&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2
>

The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he didn't say
George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly surprised
that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than, say the
Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then set the
record straight re Richard.

Katy

__________________________________________________________
Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share and store photos and experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your favourite artists. Find out more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.

--- In , Coralnelson11@... wrote:
>
> Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family having their snouts in the
trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past favours.? i have always
believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists, with a great deal of help
from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and could this spell the end of the
monarchy??

I dont think so Coral. Here, in England, it would seem 10 years on, a lot of people have
forgotton the disgraceful way Diana was treated by Charles & Camilla, Well perhaps not
forgotton but what can people do. From what I have read, Charles is detmined on Camilla
becoming Queen. Ithink this would be one step too far as on the whole shes not very
popular. It is said she is the laziest woman in the country, she doesnt seem to do that
much thats for sure although she has began to cost a lot of money, with her expensive
mode of travelling and staff etc., etc., However I dont think people would object to
Charles becoming King. And it is said that William is not ready/does not want the
responsibilities of becoming King for a long time. He has broken up with his long time
girlfriend because he is not ready for committment so I dont think he is ready to take on
the crown. He spends a lot of time (with his brother) rolling out of nightclubs drunk, which
I feel is a bit off with so many young men getting killed in Iraq (an illegal and unpopular
war). Of course I am not privvy to Will's thoughts I am just deducing this from all the stuff
written in the tabloids which is usually (regarding the Royal Family) spot on!
best wishes Eileen
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oregonkaty <[email protected]>
> To:
> Sent: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 3.04am
> Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In , Helen Rowe
> <sweethelly2003@> wrote:
> >
> > Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with
> Richard's hair.
> >
> > Helen
> >
> > Rogue <roguefem@> wrote:
> >
> > Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@] wrote:
> >
> > > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> > Tony Snow for
> > > comparison? Thankyou.
> >
> > Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> > didn't have such a bad hairdo...
> >
> >
> http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%22&btnG=Search
+Images&gbv=2
> >
>
>
> The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he didn't say
> George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly surprised
> that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than, say the
> Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then set the
> record straight re Richard.
>
> Katy
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share and store photos and
experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your favourite artists. Find out
more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.
>
>
>
>

--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<stephenmlark@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "eileen"
> <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In , Coralnelson11@
wrote:
> > >
> > > Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family
> having their snouts in the
> > trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past
> favours.? i have always
> > believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists,
with
> a great deal of help
> > from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and could
> this spell the end of the
> > monarchy??
> >
> > I dont think so Coral. Here, in England, it would seem 10 years
> on, a lot of people have
> > forgotton the disgraceful way Diana was treated by Charles &
> Camilla, Well perhaps not
> > forgotton but what can people do. From what I have read, Charles
> is detmined on Camilla
> > becoming Queen. Ithink this would be one step too far as on the
> whole shes not very
> > popular. It is said she is the laziest woman in the country, she
> doesnt seem to do that
> > much thats for sure although she has began to cost a lot of
money,
> with her expensive
> > mode of travelling and staff etc., etc., However I dont think
> people would object to
> > Charles becoming King. And it is said that William is not
> ready/does not want the
> > responsibilities of becoming King for a long time. He has broken
> up with his long time
> > girlfriend because he is not ready for committment so I dont
think
> he is ready to take on
> > the crown. He spends a lot of time (with his brother) rolling out
> of nightclubs drunk, which
> > I feel is a bit off with so many young men getting killed in Iraq
> (an illegal and unpopular
> > war). Of course I am not privvy to Will's thoughts I am just
> deducing this from all the stuff
> > written in the tabloids which is usually (regarding the Royal
> Family) spot on!
> > best wishes Eileen
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: oregonkaty <[email protected]>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 3.04am
> > > Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , Helen Rowe
> > > <sweethelly2003@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with
> > > Richard's hair.
> > > >
> > > > Helen
> > > >
> > > > Rogue <roguefem@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> > > > Tony Snow for
> > > > > comparison? Thankyou.
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> > > > didn't have such a bad hairdo...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%
> 22&btnG=Search
> > +Images&gbv=2
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he
> didn't say
> > > George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly
> surprised
> > > that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than, say
> the
> > > Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then set the
> > > record straight re Richard.
> > >
> > > Katy
> > >
> > > Eileen, thankyou so much for proving the whole point of this
> thread by quoting gossip about the current heir's life verbatim. If
> people get to read this in five hundred years time and treat it as
> gospel - that would explain why so many people read so much RUBBISH
> about Richard's reign and why we have to educate them so much.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> __
> > > Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share
> and store photos and
> > experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your
> favourite artists. Find out
> > more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Here, here, Stephen!



I think it should be kept in mind that Charles was/is not a skillful media
manipulator. Also that he would have married Camilla straight off as a young
man but was not allowed to, I believe. I think the loyalty and devotion of
the boys is a sign of what a caring father he is in private. I donýt think
Charles has a particular ambition to be king ý sort of reminds me of the
situation of Victoria and the prince who became Edward VII. Of course, life
is not certain, and Charles could become Charles III yet! For his own sake,
I think Prince William would benefit from a few more years of seasoning
before having to assume more rigorous duties.



BTW, I am no expert on the royal Princes ý but I recall a couple instances
of Harry getting into some public scenes when entering/leaving pubs (not
very spectacular, really), but I canýt recall any such incidents with
William at all. He strikes me as being *very* circumspect. I donýt think
there are quite the strictures on Harryýs behaviour that there are on
Williamýs, given that he is in the direct line of succession to the throne.
Also, Harry has forged a career in the military, and he did want to serve in
Iraq; it wasnýt his fault that he wasnýt allowed to go. Surely that is a
sign of his honourable intentions, and he shouldnýt be censured too much for
a little rowdy behaviour, after all heýs a young man growing up in a
fishbowl.



Bottom line ý my sympathies are all with Charles, and I really think the
good character of the boys is due in large part to the ways in which he has
raised them since Dianaýs passing. Also, btw, I had heard nothing but
gradually increasing regard for Camilla in her assumption of the position as
Charlesýs consort. Far from her wanting to be queen, or Charles planning to
make her queen, I am fairly sure that they have already promised that she
*wonýt* be queen if and when he assumes the throne. Is that what used to be
called a ýmorganaticý marriage? I know her title is ýDuchess of Cornwallý
and not Princess of Wales.



Just my $.02 (Cdn. :-))



Johanne



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Email ý HYPERLINK
"mailto:jltournier@..."jltournier@...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



_____

From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Stephen Lark
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 12:42 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet



--- In HYPERLINK
"mailto:%40yahoogroups.com"richardiiisocietyfo-rum@yah
oogroups.-com, "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@-...> wrote:
>
> --- In HYPERLINK
"mailto:%40yahoogroups.com"richardiiisocietyfo-rum@yah
oogroups.-com, Coralnelson11@ wrote:
> >
> > Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family
having their snouts in the
> trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past
favours.? i have always
> believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists, with
a great deal of help
> from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and could
this spell the end of the
> monarchy??
>
> I dont think so Coral. Here, in England, it would seem 10 years
on, a lot of people have
> forgotton the disgraceful way Diana was treated by Charles &
Camilla, Well perhaps not
> forgotton but what can people do. From what I have read, Charles
is detmined on Camilla
> becoming Queen. Ithink this would be one step too far as on the
whole shes not very
> popular. It is said she is the laziest woman in the country, she
doesnt seem to do that
> much thats for sure although she has began to cost a lot of money,
with her expensive
> mode of travelling and staff etc., etc., However I dont think
people would object to
> Charles becoming King. And it is said that William is not
ready/does not want the
> responsibilities of becoming King for a long time. He has broken
up with his long time
> girlfriend because he is not ready for committment so I dont think
he is ready to take on
> the crown. He spends a lot of time (with his brother) rolling out
of nightclubs drunk, which
> I feel is a bit off with so many young men getting killed in Iraq
(an illegal and unpopular
> war). Of course I am not privvy to Will's thoughts I am just
deducing this from all the stuff
> written in the tabloids which is usually (regarding the Royal
Family) spot on!
> best wishes Eileen
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Eileen, thankyou so much for proving the whole point of this
thread by quoting gossip about the currentheir'-s life verbatim. If
people get to read this happend in five hundred years time treat is
gospel - that would explain why so many people read so much RUBBISHh
about Richard's reign and why we have to educate them so much.




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.12/878 - Release Date: 6/28/2007
5:57 PM



No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.12/878 - Release Date: 6/28/2007
5:57 PM

Good grief, Eileen, you'll be telling us that Thomas More's history of
Richard is the gospel truth next !

Richard G

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> I am just deducing this from all the stuff written in the tabloids
> which is usually (regarding the Royal Family) spot on!
> best wishes Eileen

--- In , "rgcorris" <RSG_Corris@...> wrote:
>
> Good grief, Eileen, you'll be telling us that Thomas More's history of
> Richard is the gospel truth next !
>
> Richard G

Oh give us a break! It is a fact, yes fact, that lots of stuff written over the years about the
Royal Family has in fact turned out to be the truth. I could cite loads of stuff but it would
be getting way of topic. So dont bother trying to belittle what I say Richard with remarks
such as that. For your info I have on numerous occasions strongly decried Thomas More
history of Richard, You may consider yourself a wit but I strongly resent what you have
said. Youve got a bloody cheek.

Eileen
>
> --- In , "eileen"
> <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> >
> > I am just deducing this from all the stuff written in the tabloids
> > which is usually (regarding the Royal Family) spot on!
> > best wishes Eileen
>

If she is a divorcee want that prevent him from being King? Edward VIII
had to abdicate because of a divorcee.
Le
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet


--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , Coralnelson11@ wrote:
> >
> > Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family
having their snouts in the
> trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past
favours.? i have always
> believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists, with
a great deal of help
> from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and could
this spell the end of the
> monarchy??
>
> I dont think so Coral. Here, in England, it would seem 10 years
on, a lot of people have
> forgotton the disgraceful way Diana was treated by Charles &
Camilla, Well perhaps not
> forgotton but what can people do. From what I have read, Charles
is detmined on Camilla
> becoming Queen. Ithink this would be one step too far as on the
whole shes not very
> popular. It is said she is the laziest woman in the country, she
doesnt seem to do that
> much thats for sure although she has began to cost a lot of money,
with her expensive
> mode of travelling and staff etc., etc., However I dont think
people would object to
> Charles becoming King. And it is said that William is not
ready/does not want the
> responsibilities of becoming King for a long time. He has broken
up with his long time
> girlfriend because he is not ready for committment so I dont think
he is ready to take on
> the crown. He spends a lot of time (with his brother) rolling out
of nightclubs drunk, which
> I feel is a bit off with so many young men getting killed in Iraq
(an illegal and unpopular
> war). Of course I am not privvy to Will's thoughts I am just
deducing this from all the stuff
> written in the tabloids which is usually (regarding the Royal
Family) spot on!
> best wishes Eileen
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: oregonkaty <[email protected]>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 3.04am
> > Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In , Helen Rowe
> > <sweethelly2003@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with
> > Richard's hair.
> > >
> > > Helen
> > >
> > > Rogue <roguefem@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@] wrote:
> > >
> > > > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> > > Tony Snow for
> > > > comparison? Thankyou.
> > >
> > > Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> > > didn't have such a bad hairdo...
> > >
> > >
> > http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%
22&btnG=Search
> +Images&gbv=2
> > >
> >
> >
> > The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he
didn't say
> > George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly
surprised
> > that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than, say
the
> > Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then set the
> > record straight re Richard.
> >
> > Katy
> >
> > Eileen, thankyou so much for proving the whole point of this
thread by quoting gossip about the currentheir's life verbatim. If
people get to read this happend in five hundred years time treat is
gospel - that would explain why so many people read so much RUBBISHh
about Richard's reign and why we have to educate them so much.
> >
> >
> >
> >
______________________________________________________________________
__
> > Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share
and store photos and
> experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your
favourite artists. Find out
> more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>





Yahoo! Groups Links

good question..they are both divorced. that's why they had a civil ceremony and a church blessing. i know there was a bit of an issue about it. as charles becomes the head of the church of england..or defender of the faith or something...can't quite remember what it was...and i think charles plans to alter his coronation speech to something like defender of the faithS. i don't clearly remember the whole issue/discussion about the marriage.

but..lets fast forward from the 1930s to the 21st C.

is divorce really a big issue now? most of us have been divorced, back in the 30s, not so. people have been getting married and divorced with regularity since the late 60s/70s.

camilla is also british and only once divorced, wallace simpson was divorced a few times (2 or 3) and american. there were people opposed to her for one or the other, or both reasons. e8's marriage and kingship didn't stand a chance..and look at charles' aunt margaret...she had to give up her divorced boyfriend or be cut off from the family. i think e2 has softened her stance, because the public has also softened its stance. most of her age group will be long gone before charles becomes king. his generation will be more open minded.

camilla will never be crowned queen, she will be the king's consort, just as phillip is eliz's consort.

roslyn

Le Bateman <LeBateman@...> wrote:
If she is a divorcee want that prevent him from being King? Edward VIII
had to abdicate because of a divorcee.
Le
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , Coralnelson11@ wrote:
> >
> > Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family
having their snouts in the
> trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past
favours.? i have always
> believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists, with
a great deal of help
> from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and could
this spell the end of the
> monarchy??
>
> I dont think so Coral. Here, in England, it would seem 10 years
on, a lot of people have
> forgotton the disgraceful way Diana was treated by Charles &
Camilla, Well perhaps not
> forgotton but what can people do. From what I have read, Charles
is detmined on Camilla
> becoming Queen. Ithink this would be one step too far as on the
whole shes not very
> popular. It is said she is the laziest woman in the country, she
doesnt seem to do that
> much thats for sure although she has began to cost a lot of money,
with her expensive
> mode of travelling and staff etc., etc., However I dont think
people would object to
> Charles becoming King. And it is said that William is not
ready/does not want the
> responsibilities of becoming King for a long time. He has broken
up with his long time
> girlfriend because he is not ready for committment so I dont think
he is ready to take on
> the crown. He spends a lot of time (with his brother) rolling out
of nightclubs drunk, which
> I feel is a bit off with so many young men getting killed in Iraq
(an illegal and unpopular
> war). Of course I am not privvy to Will's thoughts I am just
deducing this from all the stuff
> written in the tabloids which is usually (regarding the Royal
Family) spot on!
> best wishes Eileen
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: oregonkaty <[email protected]>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 3.04am
> > Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In , Helen Rowe
> > <sweethelly2003@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with
> > Richard's hair.
> > >
> > > Helen
> > >
> > > Rogue <roguefem@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@] wrote:
> > >
> > > > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> > > Tony Snow for
> > > > comparison? Thankyou.
> > >
> > > Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> > > didn't have such a bad hairdo...
> > >
> > >
> > http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%
22&btnG=Search
> +Images&gbv=2
> > >
> >
> >
> > The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he
didn't say
> > George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly
surprised
> > that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than, say
the
> > Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then set the
> > record straight re Richard.
> >
> > Katy
> >
> > Eileen, thankyou so much for proving the whole point of this
thread by quoting gossip about the currentheir's life verbatim. If
people get to read this happend in five hundred years time treat is
gospel - that would explain why so many people read so much RUBBISHh
about Richard's reign and why we have to educate them so much.
> >
> >
> >
> >
__________________________________________________________
__
> > Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share
and store photos and
> experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your
favourite artists. Find out
> more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Yahoo! Groups Links

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "rgcorris"
<RSG_Corris@> wrote:
> >
> > Good grief, Eileen, you'll be telling us that Thomas More's
history of
> > Richard is the gospel truth next !
> >
> > Richard G
>
> Oh give us a break! It is a fact, yes fact, that lots of stuff
written over the years about the
> Royal Family has in fact turned out to be the truth. I could cite
loads of stuff but it would
> be getting way of topic. So dont bother trying to belittle what I
say Richard with remarks
> such as that. For your info I have on numerous occasions strongly
decried Thomas More
> history of Richard, You may consider yourself a wit but I
strongly resent what you have
> said. Youve got a bloody cheek.
>
> Eileen
> >
People write what they like because the Royal family almost never
respond to allegations and dead people certainly don't. These
tabloids are the equivalent of Richard's traducers.
They are more sophisticated in that one who lies all the time is
never believed but mixing a falsehood with some known facts is more
successful. This Society is supposed to be a little more
sophisticated than that.
Incidentally, Richard's option of having Colyngbourne executed is not
available to his successors.
> > --- In , "eileen"
> > <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am just deducing this from all the stuff written in the
tabloids
> > > which is usually (regarding the Royal Family) spot on!
> > > best wishes Eileen
> >
>

--- In , "Le Bateman"
<LeBateman@...> wrote:
>
> If she is a divorcee want that prevent him from being King?
Edward VIII
> had to abdicate because of a divorcee.

There was a little more to it than that. If I believed that tabloids
rumour equated to serious history I would say that she was unpopular
with the staff at Balmoral by threatening to get rid of the tartan.
Divorce was so rare in those days - none of the present Queen's royal
ancestors were divorced except, I think, John and George I.
> Le
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...>
> To: <>
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:42 AM
> Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
>
>
> --- In , "eileen"
> <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In , Coralnelson11@
wrote:
> > >
> > > Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family
> having their snouts in the
> > trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past
> favours.? i have always
> > believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists, with
> a great deal of help
> > from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and could
> this spell the end of the
> > monarchy??
> >
> > I dont think so Coral. Here, in England, it would seem 10 years
> on, a lot of people have
> > forgotton the disgraceful way Diana was treated by Charles &
> Camilla, Well perhaps not
> > forgotton but what can people do. From what I have read, Charles
> is detmined on Camilla
> > becoming Queen. Ithink this would be one step too far as on the
> whole shes not very
> > popular. It is said she is the laziest woman in the country, she
> doesnt seem to do that
> > much thats for sure although she has began to cost a lot of money,
> with her expensive
> > mode of travelling and staff etc., etc., However I dont think
> people would object to
> > Charles becoming King. And it is said that William is not
> ready/does not want the
> > responsibilities of becoming King for a long time. He has broken
> up with his long time
> > girlfriend because he is not ready for committment so I dont think
> he is ready to take on
> > the crown. He spends a lot of time (with his brother) rolling out
> of nightclubs drunk, which
> > I feel is a bit off with so many young men getting killed in Iraq
> (an illegal and unpopular
> > war). Of course I am not privvy to Will's thoughts I am just
> deducing this from all the stuff
> > written in the tabloids which is usually (regarding the Royal
> Family) spot on!
> > best wishes Eileen
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: oregonkaty <[email protected]>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 3.04am
> > > Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , Helen Rowe
> > > <sweethelly2003@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with
> > > Richard's hair.
> > > >
> > > > Helen
> > > >
> > > > Rogue <roguefem@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> > > > Tony Snow for
> > > > > comparison? Thankyou.
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> > > > didn't have such a bad hairdo...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%
> 22&btnG=Search
> > +Images&gbv=2
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he
> didn't say
> > > George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly
> surprised
> > > that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than, say
> the
> > > Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then set the
> > > record straight re Richard.
> > >
> > > Katy
> > >
> > > Eileen, thankyou so much for proving the whole point of this
> thread by quoting gossip about the currentheir's life verbatim. If
> people get to read this happend in five hundred years time treat is
> gospel - that would explain why so many people read so much RUBBISHh
> about Richard's reign and why we have to educate them so much.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
______________________________________________________________________
> __
> > > Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share
> and store photos and
> > experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your
> favourite artists. Find out
> > more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>

--- In , "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...>
wrote:
>
> > > >
>> successful. This Society is supposed to be a little more
> sophisticated than that.

Steven Oh really well maybe I am not 'sophisticated' enough for this Society then. But its
ok to be a pompous twit is it?
Eileen
> Incidentally, Richard's option of having Colyngbourne executed is not
> available to his successors.
> > > --- In , "eileen"
> > > <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am just deducing this from all the stuff written in the
> tabloids
> > > > which is usually (regarding the Royal Family) spot on!
> > > > best wishes Eileen
> > >
> >
>

--- In , "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...>
wrote:
>
>
> There was a little more to it than that. If I believed that tabloids
> rumour equated to serious history I would say that she was unpopular
> with the staff at Balmoral by threatening to get rid of the tartan.

Oh Look Steven - your repeating stuff from the tabloids - how very very unsophisticated of
you!!
Eileen
> Divorce was so rare in those days - none of the present Queen's royal
> ancestors were divorced except, I think, John and George I.
> > Le
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@>
> > To: <>
> > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:42 AM
> > Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
> >
> >
> > --- In , "eileen"
> > <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In , Coralnelson11@
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family
> > having their snouts in the
> > > trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past
> > favours.? i have always
> > > believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists, with
> > a great deal of help
> > > from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and could
> > this spell the end of the
> > > monarchy??
> > >
> > > I dont think so Coral. Here, in England, it would seem 10 years
> > on, a lot of people have
> > > forgotton the disgraceful way Diana was treated by Charles &
> > Camilla, Well perhaps not
> > > forgotton but what can people do. From what I have read, Charles
> > is detmined on Camilla
> > > becoming Queen. Ithink this would be one step too far as on the
> > whole shes not very
> > > popular. It is said she is the laziest woman in the country, she
> > doesnt seem to do that
> > > much thats for sure although she has began to cost a lot of money,
> > with her expensive
> > > mode of travelling and staff etc., etc., However I dont think
> > people would object to
> > > Charles becoming King. And it is said that William is not
> > ready/does not want the
> > > responsibilities of becoming King for a long time. He has broken
> > up with his long time
> > > girlfriend because he is not ready for committment so I dont think
> > he is ready to take on
> > > the crown. He spends a lot of time (with his brother) rolling out
> > of nightclubs drunk, which
> > > I feel is a bit off with so many young men getting killed in Iraq
> > (an illegal and unpopular
> > > war). Of course I am not privvy to Will's thoughts I am just
> > deducing this from all the stuff
> > > written in the tabloids which is usually (regarding the Royal
> > Family) spot on!
> > > best wishes Eileen
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: oregonkaty <[email protected]>
> > > > To:
> > > > Sent: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 3.04am
> > > > Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In , Helen Rowe
> > > > <sweethelly2003@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him with
> > > > Richard's hair.
> > > > >
> > > > > Helen
> > > > >
> > > > > Rogue <roguefem@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> > > > > Tony Snow for
> > > > > > comparison? Thankyou.
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> > > > > didn't have such a bad hairdo...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%
> > 22&btnG=Search
> > > +Images&gbv=2
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he
> > didn't say
> > > > George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly
> > surprised
> > > > that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than, say
> > the
> > > > Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then set the
> > > > record straight re Richard.
> > > >
> > > > Katy
> > > >
> > > > Eileen, thankyou so much for proving the whole point of this
> > thread by quoting gossip about the currentheir's life verbatim. If
> > people get to read this happend in five hundred years time treat is
> > gospel - that would explain why so many people read so much RUBBISHh
> > about Richard's reign and why we have to educate them so much.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > __
> > > > Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share
> > and store photos and
> > > experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your
> > favourite artists. Find out
> > > more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
>

Johanne Tournier wrote:

>Bottom line  my sympathies are all with Charles, and I really think the
>good character of the boys is due in large part to the ways in which he has
>raised them since Diana's passing. Also, btw, I had heard nothing but
>gradually increasing regard for Camilla in her assumption of the position as
>Charles's consort. Far from her wanting to be queen, or Charles planning to
>make her queen, I am fairly sure that they have already promised that she
>*won't* be queen if and when he assumes the throne. Is that what used to be
>called a morganatic marriage? I know her title is Duchess of Cornwall
>and not Princess of Wales.
>
>Just my $.02 (Cdn. :-))
>
>Johanne
>
>

**Personally, I think "the royals" died out 522 years ago. I couldn't
care less what Charles does, or doesn't, do. I guess the only thing I
could say about the situation is I think they should leave the poor guy
alone.

Gilda

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "Stephen Lark"
<stephenmlark@>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > There was a little more to it than that. If I believed that
tabloids
> > rumour equated to serious history I would say that she was
unpopular
> > with the staff at Balmoral by threatening to get rid of the
tartan.
>
> Oh Look Steven - your repeating stuff from the tabloids - how very
very unsophisticated of
> you!!
> Eileen

That is why I said "IF" .......
> > Divorce was so rare in those days - none of the present Queen's
royal
> > ancestors were divorced except, I think, John and George I.
> > > Le
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@>
> > > To: <>
> > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:42 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , "eileen"
> > > <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In , Coralnelson11@
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Today I read an article about Camilla Parker Bowles' family
> > > having their snouts in the
> > > > trough and Charlie being quite happy to reward them for past
> > > favours.? i have always
> > > > believed that thw Woodville family brought down the Yorkists,
with
> > > a great deal of help
> > > > from Edward 4.? Does anyone else see the similarities and
could
> > > this spell the end of the
> > > > monarchy??
> > > >
> > > > I dont think so Coral. Here, in England, it would seem 10
years
> > > on, a lot of people have
> > > > forgotton the disgraceful way Diana was treated by Charles &
> > > Camilla, Well perhaps not
> > > > forgotton but what can people do. From what I have read,
Charles
> > > is detmined on Camilla
> > > > becoming Queen. Ithink this would be one step too far as on
the
> > > whole shes not very
> > > > popular. It is said she is the laziest woman in the country,
she
> > > doesnt seem to do that
> > > > much thats for sure although she has began to cost a lot of
money,
> > > with her expensive
> > > > mode of travelling and staff etc., etc., However I dont think
> > > people would object to
> > > > Charles becoming King. And it is said that William is not
> > > ready/does not want the
> > > > responsibilities of becoming King for a long time. He has
broken
> > > up with his long time
> > > > girlfriend because he is not ready for committment so I dont
think
> > > he is ready to take on
> > > > the crown. He spends a lot of time (with his brother) rolling
out
> > > of nightclubs drunk, which
> > > > I feel is a bit off with so many young men getting killed in
Iraq
> > > (an illegal and unpopular
> > > > war). Of course I am not privvy to Will's thoughts I am just
> > > deducing this from all the stuff
> > > > written in the tabloids which is usually (regarding the Royal
> > > Family) spot on!
> > > > best wishes Eileen
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: oregonkaty <[email protected]>
> > > > > To:
> > > > > Sent: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 3.04am
> > > > > Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In , Helen Rowe
> > > > > <sweethelly2003@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can't see it myself even when I tried to visualize him
with
> > > > > Richard's hair.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Helen
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rogue <roguefem@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Stephen Lark[mailto:stephenmlark@] wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Could you post a photo, or weblink to a photo, of
> > > > > > Tony Snow for
> > > > > > > comparison? Thankyou.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Personally, I don't see a resemblence. Maybe if Snow
> > > > > > didn't have such a bad hairdo...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Tony+Snow%
> > > 22&btnG=Search
> > > > +Images&gbv=2
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The comment about the resemblance to Tony Snow (at least he
> > > didn't say
> > > > > George Bush) was the least of it, to me...I was pleasantly
> > > surprised
> > > > > that Olbermann picked out a date less know to history than,
say
> > > the
> > > > > Battle of Bosworth Field or the Battle of Hastings, then
set the
> > > > > record straight re Richard.
> > > > >
> > > > > Katy
> > > > >
> > > > > Eileen, thankyou so much for proving the whole point of this
> > > thread by quoting gossip about the currentheir's life verbatim.
If
> > > people get to read this happend in five hundred years time
treat is
> > > gospel - that would explain why so many people read so much
RUBBISHh
> > > about Richard's reign and why we have to educate them so much.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
______________________________________________________________________
> > > __
> > > > > Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus,
share
> > > and store photos and
> > > > experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your
> > > favourite artists. Find out
> > > > more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> >
>

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "Stephen Lark"
<stephenmlark@>
> wrote:
> >
> > > > >
> >> successful. This Society is supposed to be a little more
> > sophisticated than that.
>
> Steven Oh really well maybe I am not 'sophisticated' enough for
this Society then. But its
> ok to be a pompous twit is it?
> Eileen
> > Incidentally, Richard's option of having Colyngbourne executed is
not
> > available to his successors.
> > > > --- In , "eileen"
> > > > <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I am just deducing this from all the stuff written in the
> > tabloids
> > > > > which is usually (regarding the Royal Family) spot on!
> > > > > best wishes Eileen
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
" .... which is usually ..... spot on!". You are a medium, then?

Eileen, if you want to fill the board with idle tittle-tattle gleaned
from the tabloid press about the present Royal family, that is your
privilege, but don't be surprised if you are criticised for doing so.
I am sure there is a suitable message board where fans of Diana can
post their thoughts to others of like mind, but some of us appreciate
that there are two sides to every story.

Richard G

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> Oh give us a break! It is a fact, yes fact, that lots of stuff
> written over the years about the
> Royal Family has in fact turned out to be the truth. I could cite
> loads of stuff but it would
> be getting way of topic. So dont bother trying to belittle what I
> say Richard with remarks
> such as that. For your info I have on numerous occasions strongly
> decried Thomas More
> history of Richard, You may consider yourself a wit but I strongly
> resent what you have
> said. Youve got a bloody cheek.
>
> Eileen

--- In , "rgcorris" <RSG_Corris@...> wrote:
>
> Eileen, if you want to fill the board with idle tittle-tattle gleaned
> from the tabloid press about the present Royal family, that is your
> privilege, but don't be surprised if you are criticised for doing so.
> I am sure there is a suitable message board where fans of Diana can
> post their thoughts to others of like mind, but some of us appreciate
> that there are two sides to every story.
>
> Richard G

Actually Richard I was merely responding to a message/question asked by another forum
member. I did not expect to have to put up with derision/critisim to the extent that I have
for something that was I consider not offensive to anyone. Steven Lark has intimated that
I am not sophisticated enough for this Society and you yourself have intimated that I
should look for another more suitable message board for my messages, well you know
what you are right. Why on earth should I put myself in a position where I have to be
exchanging messages with such nasty/vindictive people like you two. You shall not hear
from me again
Eileen
>
> --- In , "eileen"
> <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> >
> > Oh give us a break! It is a fact, yes fact, that lots of stuff
> > written over the years about the
> > Royal Family has in fact turned out to be the truth. I could cite
> > loads of stuff but it would
> > be getting way of topic. So dont bother trying to belittle what I
> > say Richard with remarks
> > such as that. For your info I have on numerous occasions strongly
> > decried Thomas More
> > history of Richard, You may consider yourself a wit but I strongly
> > resent what you have
> > said. Youve got a bloody cheek.
> >
> > Eileen
>

I have just re-read your original posting which comprised a series of
unpleasant and snide remarks about Charles, Camilla and William. Pots
and kettles come to mind.

Richard G

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
> Why on earth should I put myself in a position where I have to be
> exchanging messages with such nasty/vindictive people like you two.

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "rgcorris"
<RSG_Corris@> wrote:
> >
> > Eileen, if you want to fill the board with idle tittle-tattle
gleaned
> > from the tabloid press about the present Royal family, that is
your
> > privilege, but don't be surprised if you are criticised for doing
so.
> > I am sure there is a suitable message board where fans of Diana
can
> > post their thoughts to others of like mind, but some of us
appreciate
> > that there are two sides to every story.
> >
> > Richard G
>
> Actually Richard I was merely responding to a message/question
asked by another forum
> member. I did not expect to have to put up with derision/critisim
to the extent that I have
> for something that was I consider not offensive to anyone. Steven
Lark has intimated that
> I am not sophisticated enough for this Society and you yourself
have intimated that I
> should look for another more suitable message board for my
messages, well you know
> what you are right. Why on earth should I put myself in a position
where I have to be
> exchanging messages with such nasty/vindictive people like you
two. You shall not hear
> from me again
> Eileen
> >
> > --- In , "eileen"
> > <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Oh give us a break! It is a fact, yes fact, that lots of stuff
> > > written over the years about the
> > > Royal Family has in fact turned out to be the truth. I could
cite
> > > loads of stuff but it would
> > > be getting way of topic. So dont bother trying to belittle what
I
> > > say Richard with remarks
> > > such as that. For your info I have on numerous occasions
strongly
> > > decried Thomas More
> > > history of Richard, You may consider yourself a wit but I
strongly
> > > resent what you have
> > > said. Youve got a bloody cheek.
> > >
> > > Eileen
> >
>
We are the Richard III Society. We exist because people have written
unfounded gossip and other fiction about Richard and because we want
to find the truth by using our critical faculties. It is logical and
consistent, therefore, to apply our critical faculties to gossip and
rumour in the present day.
If you do not intend to communicate with us for a while then I
suggest that you spend your time reading "Faking it" by the Social
Affairs Unit, particularly Anthony O'Hear's excellent essay on "The
sentimentality of modern society", before explaining to us how
treating a C20 rumour the same way as a C15 rumour makes
anyone "pompous", "vindictive" or "nasty".

Sorry to have caused such bother Eileen, I really was trying to make a valid point about the Woodvilles and the downfall of the Yorkists.? Like you I am British and can't believe how uniformed some people on this board are with regards to Charles and his pampered ways.? The queen is another matter but Charlie is quite over the top in this day and age.? His new family are getting rewarded for past favours in aiding the relationship, rather as the Woodville clan did.? I have always felt she was the true enemy of the Yorkists, but eh we are all entitled to form opionions on what we have read without I might add being labelled middle class


-----Original Message-----
From: rgcorris <RSG_Corris@...>
To:
Sent: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 1.06pm
Subject: Re: Richard liveth yet






Eileen, if you want to fill the board with idle tittle-tattle gleaned
from the tabloid press about the present Royal family, that is your
privilege, but don't be surprised if you are criticised for doing so.
I am sure there is a suitable message board where fans of Diana can
post their thoughts to others of like mind, but some of us appreciate
that there are two sides to every story.

Richard G

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> Oh give us a break! It is a fact, yes fact, that lots of stuff
> written over the years about the
> Royal Family has in fact turned out to be the truth. I could cite
> loads of stuff but it would
> be getting way of topic. So dont bother trying to belittle what I
> say Richard with remarks
> such as that. For your info I have on numerous occasions strongly
> decried Thomas More
> history of Richard, You may consider yourself a wit but I strongly
> resent what you have
> said. Youve got a bloody cheek.
>
> Eileen





________________________________________________________________________
Get a FREE AOL Email account with 2GB of storage. Plus, share and store photos and experience exclusively recorded live music Sessions from your favourite artists. Find out more at http://info.aol.co.uk/joinnow/?ncid=548.