Meghan Markle security ‘order tennis fans not to take her picture at Wimbledon’
Mandatory Credit: Photo by Javier Garcia/BPI/REX (10327626gu) Meghan Duchess of Sussex watching Serena Williams on Court 1 Wimbledon Tennis Championships, Day 4, The All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club, London, UK - 04 Jul 2019
Meghan Markle’s security warned Wimbledon spectators against snapping pictures of the royal (Picture: Rex)
Share this article via facebookShare this article via twitterShare this article via whatsapp
Author image
Martine Berg Olsen
Tuesday 9 Jul 2019 12:58 pm
Since joining the Royal Family, Meghan Markle has imposed some strict privacy rules – especially when it comes to her and Prince Harry’s son Archie.
So, it was really no surprise that tennis fans were ‘ordered not to take pictures of the Duchess of Sussex’ when she made a surprise appearance in the royal box at Wimbledon on Thursday to watch pal Serena Williams play.
However, Meghan has been branded ‘childish’ and a ‘control freak’ after her security crew warned spectators at Court 1 against snapping images of her – even though 12,000 people were sat in the crowds and millions watched on TV.
One guest was told off by Meghan’s bodyguard for pulling up his phone, but could clearly be seen snapping a selfie of himself with the court in the background.
PR consultant Sally Jones was also given a lecture, but said the security staff was left ’embarrassed’ when she told them she was taking a picture of Serena and had not spotted the royal.
Jones, 64, who was seated on the same row as the duchess, told the Daily Mail, Meghan was ‘clearly looking around to see who was looking at her’.
Man appearing to take a selfie in front of Meghan Markle at Wimbledon
One man could be seen taking a photo close to Meghan… (Picture: Rex)
She told of the incident: ‘I felt a tap on my shoulder and was asked not to take pictures of the duchess – but I had no idea she was there until then. I was absolutely gobsmacked.’
Jones added: ‘There were around 200 photographers snapping away at her but security were sent to warn an old biddy like me. It makes them look silly. It’s childish and takes us for fools.’
Jones said it was ‘another example of silly control freakery’ after the couple faced backlash for deciding to keep Archie’s christening and godparents private.
Piers Morgan also joined in and said it was ‘absurd’ for Meghan to ‘demand privacy as she sits in the royal box on a publicly-funded jolly with her mates’.
Piers told Meghan to ‘go back to America’ if she wants to be treated as a private citizen on Tuesday’s Good Morning Britain.
Kensington Palace has not commented on the incident, but a royal source told the Telegraph: ‘It’s not unusual for people accompanying members of the Royal Family at private, or public, events to ask members of the public not to take photographs. It is to enable members of the Royal Family to engage with people and events.’
Man appearing to take a selfie in front of Meghan Markle at Wimbledon
… the move caused her bodyguard to jump up… (Picture: Rex)
Security talks to a man appearing to take a selfie in front of Meghan Markle at Wimbledon
… and ask him to stop… (Picture: Rex)
… however, the man was just snapping a selfie (Picture: Rex)
She made a surprise appearance to watch pal Serena Williams play (Picture: Rex)
Meghan was surrounded by free seats at Court 1 as she watched pal Serena Williams at the Wimbledon Tennis Championships (Picture: Rex)
As many as 40 seats surrounding Meghan were kept empty by her security team.
Meghan, who wore blue jeans, a blazer, sunglasses and a hat, was joined by close friends Genevieve Hillis and Lindsay Roth as they watched Serena beat Slovenia’s Kaja Juvan on Thursday.
It was believed she broke the Wimbledon etiquette with her denim outfit, but All England Club refused to comment and insisted she was ‘perfectly well dressed’.
She arrived at the tournament two days after sister-in-law Kate Middleton attended – amid rumours of a row between the two royal couples.
Kate was happy to sit among the crowds on Court 14 last Tuesday.
The Duchess of Cambridge watches the action on Court 1 with the AELTC Vice Chairman, Ian Hewitt (left) on day two of the Wimbledon Championships (Picture: PA)
Kate with Katie Boulter (left) and Anne Keothavong (right) as they watch Harriet Dart in at Court 14 (Picture: Rex)
MORE: MEGHAN MARKLE DUCHESS OF SUSSEX
Meghan Markle takes Archie to watch dad at polo with cousins George, Charlotte and Louis
Is Prince Harry telling off his wife? _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
A gold digger is a person, typically a woman, who engages in a type of transactional relationship[1] for money rather than love. When it turns into marriage, it is a type of marriage of convenience.
Today, the courageous British people are under attack from both the sex-hedonist, Rothschild Illuminati (Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut") for BREXIT refusing to pay $BILLIONS each year to the evil Bilderberg secret society, European Union (EU) and the American Military-Industrial-Intelligence, Congressional Complex (MILINDCOMP) stoical-violence-loving, Rockefeller Illuminati (Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove") who have placed CIA sexpionage agent, gold digger and black racist, Meghan Markle (MM) --complete with fake baby--into the marriage arms of formerly-sound-military-officer-turned-drug-hedonist, Prince Harry to spy on and ruin the Royal Family and the UK's multi-billion dollar tourist industry. Those that grossly over-simplify the Illuminati as being totally united are constantly blind-sided by the viscious rivalry antics of the leftist and rightist factions catering to the sheeple's stoical or hedonist tendancies--vying for the character & control of the impending New World Order (NWO). The CIA's pro-Nazi traitor, war criminal (Operation SUNRISE/PAPER CLIP) and creator at the cost of conning Truman into wrongly disbanding the OSS, Allen Dulles placed Jackie into President John F. Kennedy's life as his wife to spy on him discretely as sex predator and stunningly-beautiful, Sharon Tate wife/baby murderer, Roman Polanski alludes to in his 2006 movie, Ghost Writer. Its no wonder the Ministry of Defense (MoD) is constantly broke and considering reducing its servicemen to an absurd 80K compared to the monstrously large and inept USMC populated by 200, 000 loud-mouthed incompetent egotists--who constantly whine they don't have enough moneies to stop wasting $BILLIONS on nonsense Precision Detonated Munitions (PDM) vulnerable 30 mph surface amphibious ships (google HMT Rohna) for instead 300 mph long-range seaplane transport/tankers that can actually get to global battlefields quickly.
The U.K. was betrayed after 1945 by the take-over of the USA by the pro-Nazi Rockefeller Illuminati faction's puppet POTUS Harry S. Truman witched out at the last minute for agricultural genius and decent human being, VP Henry Wallace--despite having helped America develop the atomic bomb. Using secret Swiss band account funds recovered from 2IC Nazi party leader Martin Bormann when Commander Ian Fleming, Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve (RNVR) and JAD's Royal Marine Commandos rescued him from Berlin in 1945, WW2-bankrupt Britain was somehow able to create their own atomic bombs as a deterrent against Rothschild-created, Soviet Russian attack & conquest.
James Bond is BORN: the True Story of Commander Ian Fleming
After the war, as a MI6-SIS master spy and propagandist, Fleming name-drops the RAF Vulcan bomber, Nassau and nuclear blackmail by S.P.E.C.T.R.E.--which really is an anagram for RESPECT--which is the main goal of the Nazi 4th Reich. In the 1961 book/1965 movie "Thunderball", the bomber has 2 x gravity nuclear bombs--which equivalates to the 2 x SkyBolt ASBMs which America reneged on their part of the development program at the Nassau conference--forcing them to give the RN Polaris SLBMs as a consolation prize--seen in the later James Bond films like "The Spy who Loved Me" in 1977.
Today, Rockefeller Illuminati Russian fear-mongers within the MILINDCOMP are whining about Russian "hypersonic weapons"--when we had Action Reaction Rockets (ARRs) back in the 1960s but because SAC bureaucrats were wings straight & level, pull-NO-G p****** not wanting to fly supersonic bombers like the B-58 and FB-111, ASBMs were not fielded. As soon as no one was looking, the supersonic B-58s and FB-111s were Type B personality, bureaucrats retired. Its a minor miracle the USAF owns & operates supersonic B-1B Lancer aka BONE heavy bombers--but without ASBMs. Vulcan bombers with SkyBolt ASBMs could have been camouflaged and hidden in the British isles to evade enemy targeting and able to take flight quickly to reach 1, 000 mile stand-off ranges avoiding having to fly into enemy SAM-infested, air defenses. SAC forward-basing its B-58s at remote locations in the CONUS was well-intentioned--but absurd since they would have had to be constantly air-refueled to reach Soviet Russia. SAC complained about B-58 lack of range when they could have been forward deployed in the UK like their slow, subsonic B-47s and B-52s and RAF Vulcans were--all of which could have been armed with SkyBolt ASBMs to solve their lack of enemy air space penetration problems. The Nazi CIA Gulag-murdered the USAF's best air reconnaissance experts by incendiary-bombing their unarmed, non-seaplane, C-124 Globemaster II transport resulting in the gaining control of U.S. spy flights from their NSA47 rival U.S. Air Force (USAF) in 1951.
CIA Sabotaged USAF C-124; 53 Men Lost to Soviet Gulags
If Brigadier General Cullen and his staff not been captured by the Soviet Navy to torture-live in their Gulags, a 7th Air Division of 509th Bomb Group (dropped atomic bombs on Japan in WW2, based in Roswell AFB where Nazi Anti-Gravity Craft aka flying saucers paid them a recce visit in '47) bombers was to be set-up in the UK to deter Communist aggression.
Got Space Access, UK?
The UK crop of captured Nazi rocket scientists Fleming warns about in Moonraker were clearly inferior to the highly-competent, von Braun liquid rocket fuel team Dulles brought over that empowered the U.S. Army until prevented from putting the 1st satellite into orbit [combatreform.org/warandpeaceinthespaceage.htm] and stamped out their solid rocket fuel Jack Parsons, Rothschild sex fiend rivals who live on in the JPL and techno-demented, Scientology religious cult popular in Hollywood. However, this wasn't enough trouble instigation for the evil FBI--who also has no Constitutional right to exist like the horrid CIA--they also alienated America's top Chinese ethnicity rocket scientist who fled to Communist China to start their ballistic missile and space program successful to the current day and poses an existential threat to America.
combatreform.org/airrecon.htm
Immediately after the war, clever UK scientists figured they could upgrade captured German V-2 ballistic missiles with a pressurized re-entry capsule and placed the 1st man into space. Drained constantly of funds by WW2 debts and the Rothschild Illuminati's lavish lifestyles, this promising MEGAROC project was cancelled. The main thing holding the UK back from being a world super power again is the parasitic Rothschild Illuminati sucking them dry.
British V-2 - How the U.K. Almost Won the Space Race
Moreover, SkyBolt ASBM variants could shoot-down orbiting enemy satellites, place our own small satellites into space and launch MACH 5 aerospace spy planes like FISH using B-58's MACH 2 aerodynamic flight lift as the "1st stage". Vulcans could have destroyed the Stanley airfield runway better during the 1982 Falklands War with a huge SkyBolt ASBM bomblet payload than the tedious constant air-refueling needed to get them directly overhead to drop gravity HE bombs. Moreover, having SEAPLANE air refueling tankers can stay filled up by RN submarines and surface ships to extend RAF aircraft reach all over the world as the USN Tradewind tanker seaplane proved but failed because its faulty contraprop engines should have been instead powered by the proven British MAMBAs used successfully for years in their Fairey Gannett carrier-based ASW planes.
The origin of the Vulcan and the other V bombers is linked with early British atomic weapon programme and nuclear deterrent policies. Britain's atom bomb programme began with Air Staff Operational Requirement OR.1001 issued in August 1946. This anticipated a government decision in January 1947 to authorise research and development work on atomic weapons, the U.S. Atomic Energy Act of 1946 (McMahon Act) having prohibited exporting atomic knowledge, even to countries that had collaborated on the Manhattan Project.[4] OR.1001 envisaged a weapon not to exceed 24 ft 2 in (7.37 m) in length, 5 ft (1.5 m) in diameter and 10,000 lb (4,500 kg) in weight. The weapon had to be suitable for release from 20,000 ft (6,100 m) to 50,000 ft (15,000 m).[5]
At the same time, the Royal Air Force (RAF) was having problems with their MRBM missile project, the Blue Streak, which was long overdue [EDITOR: Fleming's warning in 1953 Moonraker that captured Nazi rocket scientists were sabotaging Britain's missile program]. Even if this was successful, it faced the serious problem of basing. No fixed land-based missile system could be credibly installed in the British Isles; they were well within the range of Soviet air strikes. The limited land mass available meant it would be relatively easy for missile sites to be spotted no matter what security measures were taken. Suitable locations for construction also carried a social and political cost. Fixed land-based ballistic missile sites need many thousands of acres per squadron (typically ten missiles); and the squadrons need to be apportioned over many thousands of square miles so that no single attack could conceivably destroy them all in one strike.
This left the deterrent based on their own bomber force, the V bomber fleet, which the RAF had already long concluded would be unable to penetrate Soviet defenses by about 1960. The RAF was in the process of introducing their own stand-off missile, the 950 kilometres (590 mi) ranged Mach 3 Blue Steel. While capable, the missile flew at altitudes and speeds that left it vulnerable to improving SAMs, and it had a number of reliability and serviceability issues that made it less than ideal. A faster, longer-ranged version was being designed, Blue Steel II, but it would be some time before it could enter service.
The long-range Skybolt would eliminate the need for both the Blue Streak and the Blue Steel II. Blue Steel II was canceled in December 1959 and the British Cabinet decided in February 1960 to cancel Blue Streak as well. Prime Minister Macmillan met [EDITOR: Rockefeller Illuminati puppet] President Eisenhower in March 1960 and agreed to purchase 144 Skybolts for the RAF. By agreement, British funding for research and development was limited to that required to modify the V bombers to take the missile, but the British were allowed to fit their own warheads and the Americans were given nuclear submarine basing facilities in [EDITOR: Faslane] Scotland.[4] Following the agreement, the Blue Streak program was formally canceled in April 1960 and in May 1960 an agreement for an initial order of 100 Skybolts was concluded.[4]
Avro was made an associate contractor to manage the Skybolt program for the United Kingdom and four different schemes were submitted to find a platform for the missile.[4] A number of different aircraft were considered, including a variant of the Vickers VC10 airliner and two of the current V bombers, the Avro Vulcan and Handley Page Victor.[4] It was decided to use the Vulcan to initially carry two missiles each on hardpoints outboard of the main landing gear.[4]
Development and testing
During development, it was decided that the system could not reach the required accuracy at the desired range without an update to the guidance system. This led to the introduction of a star tracker platform that would be used to further enhance the existing inertial navigation system. The system was capable of tracking bright stars in direct sunlight, a challenging requirement. This change meant that the missile could only be carried in locations where the front of the missile could continually observe the sky. This had always been the case on the USAF's B-52 bombers, where they were carried under the wings, but presented a problem for some of the UK designs. In the end, Skybolt was limited to the Vulcan.
By 1961, several test articles were ready for testing from B-52's, with drop-tests starting in January. In January 1961 a Vulcan visited the Douglas plant at Santa Monica, California, to make sure the modifications to the aircraft were electrically compatible with the missile. In Britain, compatibility trials with mockups started on the Vulcan.[4] Powered tests started in April 1962, but the test series went badly, with the first five trials ending in failure of one sort or another. The first fully successful flight occurred on 19 December 1962.[5]
Cancellation
By this point, the value of the Skybolt system in the U.S. had been seriously eroded. The Polaris had recently gone into service, with overall capabilities similar to Skybolt, but with "loiter" times on the order of months instead of hours. Additionally, the [EDITOR: large land mass] U.S. Air Force itself was well into the process of developing the Minuteman [solid rocket fuel, intercontinental ballistic] missile, whose improved accuracy reduced the need for any bomber attacks. [EDITOR: Secretary of Defense] Robert McNamara was particularly opposed to the bomber force [EDITOR: he served as a bombing target officer under General LeMay in WW2, go figure?] and repeatedly stated he felt that the combination of SLBMs and ICBMs would render them useless. [EDITOR: so much for the TRIAD's sound redundancy] He pressed for the cancellation of Skybolt as an unnecessary program.
The British, on the other hand, had canceled all other projects to concentrate fully on Skybolt. When McNamara informed them that they were considering canceling the program in November 1962, a firestorm of protest broke out in the House of Commons. Jo Grimond noted "Does not this mark the absolute failure of the policy of the independent deterrent? Is it not the case that everybody else in the world knew this, except the Conservative Party in this country?"[6] [EDITOR: former naval officer] President Kennedy officially cancelled the program on 22 December 1962.[1]
As the political row grew into a major crisis, an emergency meeting between parties from the U.S. and U.K. was called, leading to the Nassau agreement. Over the next few days, a new plan was hammered out that saw the U.K. purchase the Polaris SLBM, but equipped with British warheads that lacked the dual-key system. The U.K. would thus retain its independent deterrent force, although its control passed from the RAF largely to the Royal Navy. The Polaris, a much better weapon system for the U.K., was a major "scoop" and has been referred to as "almost the bargain of the century".[7] The RAF kept a tactical nuclear capability with the [EDITOR: gravity bomb] WE.177 which armed V bombers and later the Panavia Tornado force. The "Skybolt Crisis" was a major event in the eventual downfall of the Macmillan government.[citation needed]
A B-52G launched the last XGAM-87A missile down the Atlantic Missile Range a day after the program was canceled.[8] In June 1963, the XGAM-87A was redesignated as XAGM-48A[9]
****
Fleming's Nazi traitor, Hugo Drax in Moonraker is clearly embodied in today's rocket launch, Illuminati techno-industrialist, Elon Musk who works tirelessly for NWO goals--like planting an electronic 666 Mark of the Beast chip into all sheeple's brains to control them with TRANS-HUMANISM.
Musk has broken the high cost riddle of ARR booster rockets by cheap fuels and tail-sitter landing recovery desired from the first days of space exploration and seen in countless science fiction movies but not possible until the advent of precise computer controls. Like Drax in Moonraker, Musk holds a near monopoly on space access for the U.S. MILINDCOMP and NASA whose poorly-engineered Space Shuttle fleet was retired because the Illuminati has denied the world of a Single Stage-to-Orbit (SSTO), easy space access, SPACEPLANE because they don't want sheeple in space--lest they realize we all live in God's creation as per the 1611 King James Bible--and not the Satanic hell they plan for us. Nolan's "Interstellar" meekly raises secret space program AGC superior efficiency over white public-consumption, ARR question to make space colonization viable--but "Little Spaceship on the Prairie" to build sheeple character is violently opposed by the evil elites.
The evil CIA has sabotaged both Burt Rutan's 2-stage mothership plus spaceplane tourism project and the Russian Soyuz re-entry capsule docked to the International Space Station (ISS). Its way over-due to DISBAND THE CIA whose non-stop dirty tricks are revealed to the world like their disgusting recent illegal spying of President of the United States (POTUS) Trump's phone calls to play a nit-picking impeachment GOTYA! game. They have done far worse; murdering POTUS JFK in Dulles, Texas, his brother RFK running for that office, black civil rights leader MLK, Congressmen Hale Boggs, Nick Begich...and the late Jim Marrs suspected MI6-SIS master spy Ian Fleming himself on a golf course in 1964 lest he blow-the-whistle on the BS Dulles-misled, Warren Commission white-wash to his global 007 fan base.
The Prince of Wales was said to be incensed not only by the content of the interview but the timing - as it clashed with Charles’ 12-day tour to India, New Zealand and the Solomon Islands this week and broke a long-standing tradition that one royal does not upstage another. Charles’ royal visit was intended to focus on environmental issues close to the Prince’s heart bit it was massively overshadowed by Prince Andrew’s now-notorious Newsnight interview and the backlash that followed.
The painful blow Queen dealt Prince Andrew in wake of royal retreat
Royal outrage: Prince William reveals true feelings on Prince Andrew
The Prince of Wales has remained tight-lipped throughout the tour, part of it carried out with Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, over the Epstein scandal.
But it is understood Charles is gearing up for a showdown with his brother and is determined to get a grip on the situation once back to the UK to avoid any further fallout.
This comes after a Buckingham Palace source told the Mirror Prince Charles "will be having stern words" with Andrew upon his return from the tour.
PROMOTED STORY
Brighten That Smile With Affordable Dental Implants
Brighten That Smile With Affordable Dental Implants
(Yahoo! Search)
The source claimed: “The Queen has told Andrew he has her support but it is clear his brother Charles will be having stern words with him when he gets home.
prince charles prince andrew bbc interview epstein scandal royal family news
Prince Charles is expected to confront his brother Prince Andrew when he returns from his overseas tour (Image: GETTY)
prince charles prince andrew bbc interview epstein scandal royal family news
Prince Andrew's interview with Emily Maitlis aired on November 16 (Image: GETTY)
“Her very public show of support is a clear indication she has forgiven him but he has been ordered to keep in line. The inquests have already begun inside the Palace.
“Charles will demand to know how on earth this could have been allowed to happen, who was advising Andrew and why he was not consulted about his decision to go ahead with the interview.
“He has been ordered to step back from royal life until he has unequivocally cleared his name or the Epstein case is over, which could be years. The road to redemption might not only be long, it could be completely blocked off.”
READ MORE: Prince Andrew passes the baton to Eugenie and Beatrice
prince charles prince andrew bbc interview epstein scandal royal family news
The Queen and Prince Andrew were spotted horse riding on Friday (Image: REUTERS)
RELATED ARTICLES
Prince Andrew interview: ‘Palace needs to shut him down!’
Royal showdown: Furious Prince Charles to 'read riot act' to Andrew
Prince Andrew’s link to the scandal is not going away any time soon.
The BBC is scheduled to broadcast an interview with Virginia Roberts, who claims to have been trafficked for sex, in December.
Following the disastrous interview aired on November 16, in which Andrew failed to express sympathy for convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s victims or regret over their friendship, the Prince announced he was temporarily stepping down from public duties.
DON'T MISS
Shamed Andrew has ‘damaged monarchy’ - poll verdict on the Prince [POLL]
Prince Andrew fiasco sends chill through Royal Family’s Christmas [INSIGHT]
Prince Andrew interview done 'considerable damage to monarchy' [OPINION]
prince charles prince andrew bbc interview epstein scandal royal family news
Prince Charles and Camilla toured New Zealand last week (Image: GETTY)
prince charles prince andrew bbc interview epstein scandal royal family news
Prince Charles leaving the Solomon Islands this morning (Image: GETTY)
In recent days, as a growing number of companies said they would review their support to the Duke’s charities and organisations, Prince Andrew also stepped back from most of his patronages to avoid collateral damage.
While he will remain the patron of most organisations he has been supporting throughout the years, he will be taking no active part in them for the time being.
And, despite Buckingham Palace announcing last week the Duke would have continued to work on Pitch@Palace, his entrepreneurship scheme, it has been claimed Prince Andrew is also to cease any involvement in it.
This comes after 10 of the 35 companies backing the scheme withdrew their support and others announced they were reviewing it at the end of the year.
prince charles prince andrew bbc interview epstein scandal royal family news
Royal men and their military service (Image: EXPRESS)
Among the businesses who pulled out, there were KPMG, Standard Chartered and Bosch.
Prince Andrew, widely believed to be the Queen’s favourite child, was spotted horse riding with his mother on Friday on the grounds of Windsor Castle.
This outing was first seen as a show of unity and support.
However, the monarch is believed to have cancelled the lavish celebrations planned for Prince Andrew’s birthday, who turns 60 next February, The Times wrote.
Prince Andrew
Buckingham Palace said last week Prince Andrew will continue to work on Pitch@Palace (Image: GETTY)
TRENDING
Meghan Markle posts heartwarming Instagram update after receiving ‘special surprise’
Meghan Markle posts heartwarming Instagram update after receiving ‘special surprise’
Prince Charles and Camilla split: Why did Duchess return to UK as Charles continued tour?
Prince Charles and Camilla split: Why did Duchess return to UK as Charles continued tour?
Royal heartbreak: Kate and William send Twitter into meltdown with devastating update
Royal heartbreak: Kate and William send Twitter into meltdown with devastating update
Instead of throwing a party for Andrew, the Queen will host a small family dinner, the newspaper added.
The Epstein scandal could further worsen the relationship between the two brothers, believed to have been under strain since 2012, after Prince Charles announced his desire once King to slim down monarchy.
His intentions were made clear during the Diamond Jubilee celebrations, when wider members of the Royal Family were excluded from the symbolic appearance on the iconic Buckingham Palace balcony.
Queen Elizabeth is reportedly handing over her duties to her son Charles, the Prince of Wales, when she turns 95 (Picture: Reuters) Prince Charles is preparing to take over leadership of the Royals when the Queen turns 95, it has been reported.
The Queen’s oldest son met with his father at Sandringham yesterday to discuss the continuing fallout from his brother’s disastrous TV interview about his links to Jeffry Epstein. Prince Charles’ key role in ‘retiring’ Prince Andrew from public life has fed speculation he is preparing to become ‘shadow King’, which would see him control day-to-day royal affairs while his mother remains monarch.
Her Majesty will turn 95 in 18 months – the same age at which her husband Prince Philip withdrew from his public duties. There is talk among courtiers that she may use the milestone to allow her son to become Prince Regent, the Sun reports.
Prince Charlies is rumoured to be stepping in as ‘Prince Regent’ in 18 months if the Queen retires (Picture: Rex) It is believed he met with his father Prince Philip to discuss the plan yesterday (Picture: Rex) A royal source told the paper: ‘The scandal surrounding Andrew and Epstein gave Charles an opportunity to step in to show that he can run The Firm.
No one is bigger than the institution of the Royal Family. Not even Andrew, the Queen’s favourite son. ADVERTISING ‘Charles recognised that and acted decisively — like the king he may well soon be. This was the moment when Charles stepped up as Prince Regent, the Shadow King.’
The Queen has been gradually reducing the number of public engagements she attends from 332 in 2016 to a 283 in 2018. The Prince of Wales has been on an official tour of New Zealand but headed straight for the Queen’s Norfolk estate when he landed yesterday. It is believed Charles will also be discussing the fall out from Prince Andrew’s car crash Epstein interview
Philip, 98, spends most of his time at Wood Farm, a small residence on the estate. It is believed that Charles will seek his father’s advise over what the family should do next amid continued scrutiny over Prince Andrew’s links to billionaire paedophile Jeffry Epstein.
The Duke of York appeared on Newsnight earlier this month to discuss his controversial friendship, in what was described as a ‘car crash interview’.
Since then, he has been asked to take a step back from public duties while many charities he was a patron of have chosen to distance themselves from him. It is been reported that Charles wants Andrew to ‘permanently retire’ from his royal role.
It comes after it emerged that Prince William was reported to be involved in the decision to sack the Duke of York. The second in line to the throne is said to believe that the decision to get Andrew to withdraw from public duties was ‘the right thing to do’.
Prince Charles will see change in attitude when King says expert
Play Video
Prince Charles, as the current monarch Queen Elizabeth II’s eldest son, will one day take over the British throne. The Prince of Wales has been the heir apparent since the age of three, when his mother was proclaimed Queen in 1952. But the Prince may never become King Charles III.
RELATED ARTICLES
Queen Elizabeth II shock: Can the Queen STOP Camilla becoming Consort?
Will Queen give Charles THIS title when she step down in 18 MONTHS?
The reason Charles might not become King Charles III is because he is free to choose his own regnal title.
Though most monarchs of the United Kingdom have used their first baptismal name as their regnal name, on three occasions monarchs have chosen a different name.
First, Queen Victoria had been christened Alexandrina Victoria, but took the throne under the name Victoria.
King Edward VII, Victoria’s eldest son, chose Edward as his regnal title, although he had been known by his first name of Albert.
PROMOTED STORY
Never Overpay Again - This Tool Finds Every Voucher Code on the Internet
Never Overpay Again - This Tool Finds Every Voucher Code on the Internet
(Honey)
READ MORE: Prince Charles title: Will Charles change his name when he is King?
Royal revelation
Royal revelation: The Prince of Charles may never become King Charles III (Image: GETTY)
Royal revelation
Royal revelation: Prince Charles crowned Prince of Wales by Queen Elizabeth II (Image: GETTY)
READ MORE
Revealed: How Prince Philip ‘never wanted royal title’
In 1936, after the abdication crisis, Prince Albert, Duke of York, assumed the throne as King George VI rather than "King Albert".
His full name was Albert Frederick Arthur George; like Edward VII and Victoria he used another of his names.
There has been speculation the Prince of Wales, whose full name is Charles Philip Arthur George, may elect not to be known as "Charles III”.
This is reportedly out of concern to be compared with Charles II of England, who was known for his Catholic sympathies or Charles I of England, who was executed after the English Civil War.
Instead of becoming King Charles he might choose to become King George VII, King Philip, or King Arthur.
Royal revealtion
Royal revealtion: Prince Charles crowned Prince of Wales by Queen Elizabeth II (Image: GETTY)
Who were the other King Charles?
King Charles I of England
Charles I was born on November 19, 1600, and died in 1649).
He was King of England, King of Scotland, and King of Ireland from March 27, 1625, until his execution in 1649.
DON'T MISS
Prince Andrew family tree: Inside the family of the Queen's son [MAP]
Queen family tree: A FULL look back at the Queen’s HUGE family [INSIGHT]
The bizarre ritual Prince Charles carries out whenever he plants trees [VIDEO]
RELATED ARTICLES
How Prince Charles shares Dracula’s blood line
Prince Philip revelation: Duke's shocking connection to Russia
READ MORE
Prince Harry row: How Queen could control Duke's decisions
Charles was born into the House of Stuart as the second son of King James VI of Scotland, but after his father inherited the English throne in 1603 (as James I), he moved to England, where he spent much of the rest of his life.
He became the heir apparent to the three kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland in 1612 on the death of his elder brother Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales.
After his succession in 1625, Charles clashed with the Parliament of England, which sought to curb his royal prerogative.
King Charles I believed in the divine right of kings, and was determined to govern according to his own conscience.
Royal revelation
Royal revelation: Line of succession to the British throne (Image: EXPRESS)
King Charles II
Charles II was King of England, Scotland and Ireland.
He was king of Scotland from 1649 until his deposition in 1651, and king of England, Scotland and Ireland from the 1660 Restoration of the monarchy until his death.
King Charles II was the eldest surviving child of Charles I of England Scotland and Ireland and Henrietta Maria of France.
TRENDING
Royal heartbreak: Meghan Markle drops devastating Christmas update on Instagram
Royal heartbreak: Meghan Markle drops devastating Christmas update on Instagram
Queen Elizabeth II shock: How Her Majesty’s death will spark an unusual chain of events
Queen Elizabeth II shock: How Her Majesty’s death will spark an unusual chain of events
Royal row: How Princess Eugenie could be FORCED to move out of Kensington Palace home
Royal row: How Princess Eugenie could be FORCED to move out of Kensington Palace home
During Charles II reign, however, England entered the period known as the English Interregnum or the English Commonwealth, and the country was a de facto republic led by Oliver Cromwell.
The King fled to mainland Europe and spent the next nine years in exile in France.
But a political crisis that followed the death of Mr Cromwell in 1658 resulted in the restoration of the monarchy, and Charles was invited to return to Britain.
Charles II was one of the most popular and beloved kings of England, known as the Merry Monarch.
PrinceCharlesWilliamExpres.jpg
Description:
Daily Express headline that made Charles VERY ANGRY
Royal ancestry expert Matt Baker claimed Princess Diana is from a more “royal bloodline” than Prince Charles, which also makes the Duke of Cambridge “more royal” than his 70-year-old dad. Prince Charles is the first in line to the throne and will succeed his mother Queen Elizabeth II, who is the longest-reigning British monarch, when she abdicates or dies.
ADVERTISING
inRead invented by Teads
RELATED ARTICLES
How Charles told Camilla he wanted to ‘live inside her trousers'
Meghan's split from William and Kate 'symbolic' of something 'deeper'
The historian told the Daily Star: “She has more English royal blood in her veins than does Prince Charles, her 16th cousin once removed.
“All of it flowing from illegitimate unions.
PROMOTED STORY
Find the best anti-aging cream deals
Find the best anti-aging cream deals
(Yahoo! Search)
“Four of her ancestors were mistresses to English Kings.”
Queen and Prince Charles and Prince William
The Queen has been the country's longest ever reig (Image: GETTY )
Mr Baker claimed the Spencer family tree goes back to Charles II and James II.
Whereas Prince Charles, he argued, is a product of the “illegitimate” bloodline. He is therefore less royal than Princess Diana, making his children more royal than him.
Royal family trees are often very closely related to each other and Prince Charles and Diana are no different, the pair were 7th cousins once removed.
The Palace has constantly insisted that Princes Charles’ wife, Camilla Parker Bowles, will become Princess Consort when he takes the throne signalling she would decline the title of Queen.
Prince William and Prince Charles
The royal expert has claimed William is "more royal" than Charles (Image: GETTY )
Prince William will inherit his father’s title of the Prince of Wales and his estate when he becomes King.
Charles became Prince of Wales at the age on nine in 1958 and he was formally given the title in 1969 by the Queen.
Queen Elizabeth became the monarch in 1952 at the age of 25 when her father, King George VI passed away. At the time, Prince Charles was just three years old.
Prince Charles wants 'different role' as monarch says expert
Play Video
In April 2018, Prince Charles was appointed as the QUeen’s successor as Head of the Commonwealth.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2020 4:21 am Post subject:
SO the queen is due to 'retire' in April 2021 when she turns 95 (reluctantly)
Since that was announced:
Prince Andrew - has been Character assassinated
Prince Harry - has been spun out, banished abroad by a honey trap
Now Beatrice and Eugenie have got the boot too
Charles is sealing up his power, cutting out anyone who might challenge his rule.
Why does he feel the need to do this?
Royal SNUB: Prince Andrew furious as Beatrice and Eugenie forced out of Queen role
PRINCE CHARLES blocked Prince Andrew's daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie having roles within the Royal Family where they would represent Queen Elizabeth II according to a royal expert.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1249780/royal-news-Prince-Andrew- Princess-Beatrice-Eugenie-of-york-Queen-Elizabeth-II-royal-family
Ms Nicholl stated Prince Charles told the Princesses that they had to "go and make it on their own" much to the annoyance of Prince Andrew...
"You have got to FTAC which Scotland Yard has.
"FTAC is people who are known to have a grudge against the Royal Family and are kept an eye on I believe.
"So you need all of that.
"If something goes wrong in the private sector we haven’t got several carriers of policemen sitting around the corner coming to our assistance."
Prince Charles is preparing to take over leadership of the Royals when the Queen turns 95, it has been reported.
The Queen’s oldest son met with his father at Sandringham yesterday to discuss the continuing fallout from his brother’s disastrous TV interview about his links to Jeffry Epstein.
Prince Charles’ key role in ‘retiring’ Prince Andrew from public life has fed speculation he is preparing to become ‘shadow King’, which would see him control day-to-day royal affairs while his mother remains monarch.
Her Majesty will turn 95 in 18 months – the same age at which her husband Prince Philip withdrew from his public duties.
There is talk among courtiers that she may use the milestone to allow her son to become Prince Regent, the Sun reports.
A royal source told the paper: ‘The scandal surrounding Andrew and Epstein gave Charles an opportunity to step in to show that he can run The Firm. No one is bigger than the institution of the Royal Family. Not even Andrew, the Queen’s favourite son.
‘Charles recognised that and acted decisively — like the king he may well soon be. This was the moment when Charles stepped up as Prince Regent, the Shadow King.’
The Queen has been gradually reducing the number of public engagements she attends from 332 in 2016 to a 283 in 2018.
The Prince of Wales has been on an official tour of New Zealand but headed straight for the Queen’s Norfolk estate when he landed yesterday.
Prince Andrew & the Epstein Scandal: The Newsnight Interview
It is believed Charles will also be discussing the fall out from Prince Andrew’s car crash Epstein interview (Picture: BBC NEWS)
Philip, 98, spends most of his time at Wood Farm, a small residence on the estate.
It is believed that Charles will seek his father’s advise over what the family should do next amid continued scrutiny over Prince Andrew’s links to billionaire paedophile Jeffry Epstein.
The Duke of York appeared on Newsnight earlier this month to discuss his controversial friendship, in what was described as a ‘car crash interview’.
Since then, he has been asked to take a step back from public duties while many charities he was a patron of have chosen to distance themselves from him.
It is been reported that Charles wants Andrew to ‘permanently retire’ from his royal role.
It comes after it emerged that Prince William was reported to be involved in the decision to sack the Duke of York.
Comment Faye BrownWednesday 27 Nov 2019 2:39 pm Share this article via facebookShare this article via twitterShare this article via messenger 18.6k SHARES Queen Elizabeth is reportedly handing over her duties to her son Charles, the Prince of Wales, when she turns 95 (Picture: Reuters) Prince Charles is preparing to take over leadership of the Royals when the Queen turns 95, it has been reported. The Queen’s oldest son met with his father at Sandringham yesterday to discuss the continuing fallout from his brother’s disastrous TV interview about his links to Jeffry Epstein. Prince Charles’ key role in ‘retiring’ Prince Andrew from public life has fed speculation he is preparing to become ‘shadow King’, which would see him control day-to-day royal affairs while his mother remains monarch. Her Majesty will turn 95 in 18 months – the same age at which her husband Prince Philip withdrew from his public duties. TOP ARTICLES 1/5 READ MORE At least 22 dead and ‘number will rise’ in Canada’s deadliest mass shooting There is talk among courtiers that she may use the milestone to allow her son to become Prince Regent, the Sun reports. Prince Charlies is rumoured to be stepping in as ‘Prince Regent’ in 18 months if the Queen retires (Picture: Rex) It is believed he met with his father Prince Philip to discuss the plan yesterday (Picture: Rex) A royal source told the paper: ‘The scandal surrounding Andrew and Epstein gave Charles an opportunity to step in to show that he can run The Firm. No one is bigger than the institution of the Royal Family. Not even Andrew, the Queen’s favourite son. ‘Charles recognised that and acted decisively — like the king he may well soon be. This was the moment when Charles stepped up as Prince Regent, the Shadow King.’ The Queen has been gradually reducing the number of public engagements she attends from 332 in 2016 to a 283 in 2018. The Prince of Wales has been on an official tour of New Zealand but headed straight for the Queen’s Norfolk estate when he landed yesterday. It is believed Charles will also be discussing the fall out from Prince Andrew’s car crash Epstein interview (Picture: BBC NEWS) Prince Andrew has 'no recollection' of meeting sexual abuse claimant Play Video Loaded: 0% 0:00Progress: 0% PlayMute Current Time0:00 / Duration Time0:31 Fullscreen Philip, 98, spends most of his time at Wood Farm, a small residence on the estate. It is believed that Charles will seek his father’s advise over what the family should do next amid continued scrutiny over Prince Andrew’s links to billionaire paedophile Jeffry Epstein. The Duke of York appeared on Newsnight earlier this month to discuss his controversial friendship, in what was described as a ‘car crash interview’. Since then, he has been asked to take a step back from public duties while many charities he was a patron of have chosen to distance themselves from him. It is been reported that Charles wants Andrew to ‘permanently retire’ from his royal role. It comes after it emerged that Prince William was reported to be involved in the decision to sack the Duke of York. The second in line to the throne is said to believe that the decision to get Andrew to withdraw from public duties was ‘the right thing to do’.
The Queen still attends events and carries out engagements (Image: Getty Images)
When you subscribe we will use the information you provide to send you these newsletters. Sometimes they’ll include recommendations for other related newsletters or services we offer. OurPrivacy Noticeexplains more about how we use your data, and your rights. You can unsubscribe at any time.
The Queen could 'retire' from her royal duties in just 18 months time, passing the role to her son Prince Charles, according to reports.
The Monarch will turn 95 in April 2021, the age her husband Prince Philip was when he stepped back from his royal duties two years ago.
Sources say that while words such as "regime change" are banned, there is an understanding that she will step back at some point, reports the Sun .
According to the newspaper she may use this milestone to "retire" from her official work, but still remain as Monarch.
This means Prince Charles will become Prince Regent, when an heir to the throne acts as the monarch officially in place of the sovereign.
The Queen has already handed over a number of her duties (Image: Getty Images)
RELATED ARTICLES
How Prince Andrew scandal is affecting rest of Royal Family - from Queen to Meghan Markle
Prince Philip won Queen over with 'unusual skill' - and he left her 'pink-faced'
She has already passed a number of her duties down to her son and other members of the Royal Family, however she still has a very busy diary of engagements.
In 2018 she carried out 283 engagements, which while less than 2016's 332, is still very impressive considering her age.
Earlier this month Charles laid a wreath on her behalf at the Remembrance Sunday service and the Duchess of Cambridge has taken on a number of her patronages including the Royal Photographic Society.
Many believe that the sacking of Prince Andrew from his royal roles was an example of Charles stepping up and pulling the strings about the Royal Family's future.
Prince Charles was away on a Royal Tour when the scandal broke, but he was still very involved in the decision (Image: Getty Images)
READ MORE
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry share unseen wedding photo to celebrate special day
A royal source told the newspaper: “Planning for Charles to become king has been going on for some time. A transition is plainly already underway. Her Majesty is in her nineties and can understandably only do so much.
“The scandal surrounding Andrew and Epstein gave Charles an opportunity to step in to show that he can run The Firm. No one is bigger than the institution of the Royal Family. Not even Andrew, the Queen’s favourite son.
“Charles recognised that and acted decisively — like the king he may well soon be. This was the moment when Charles stepped up as Prince Regent, the Shadow King.”
While it was the Queen who actually delivered the news to her favourite son and informed the rest of the Firm, Charles was said to be very involved in the decision.
It has been a difficult few weeks for the Royal Family (Image: AFP via Getty Images)
READ MORE
Inside Queen's sacking of Prince Andrew after he was summoned to Buckingham Palace
The Duke of York was at the centre of a huge scandal after his disastrous interview with BBC Newsnight presenter Emily Maitlis about his paedophile pal Jeffrey Epstein.
Andrew, 59, is said to have held crisis talks with Charles, 71, by telephone before he was summoned to Buckingham Palace by the Queen.
During the meeting with his 93-year-old mum, the Duke issued a grovelling apology for heaping shame on the Royal Family.
CLICK TO PLAY
SEE THE MOMENT PRINCE CHARLES AWKWARDLY IGNORES QUESTION ABOUT ANDREW
READ MORE
The Queen
Queen has only worn trousers once
Queen's favourite child 'revealed'
Why Queen refused surgery on her knee
Rolf Harris painting Her Majesty the Queen
Queen's met world's worst villains
Royal who nicknamed the Queen Gary
Queen's sweet gift to Meghan Markle
Connection between Queen's outfits
Queen Elizabeth II
Latest on the Queen
A source told the Telegraph it was the Queen's decision to force Andrew to step back from public life, adding: "The Duke was summoned from his home, Royal Lodge Windsor, to see the Queen personally at Buckingham Palace.
"Effectively he was told to bow out gracefully.
"They agreed he could release a statement saying it was his decision but it was the Queen who told him to do it."
Prince Charles, as the current monarch Queen Elizabeth II’s eldest son, will one day take over the British throne. The Prince of Wales has been the heir apparent since the age of three, when his mother was proclaimed Queen in 1952. But the Prince may never become King Charles III.
Queen Elizabeth II shock: Can the Queen STOP Camilla becoming Consort?
Will Queen give Charles THIS title when she step down in 18 MONTHS?
The reason Charles might not become King Charles III is because he is free to choose his own regnal title.
Though most monarchs of the United Kingdom have used their first baptismal name as their regnal name, on three occasions monarchs have chosen a different name.
First, Queen Victoria had been christened Alexandrina Victoria, but took the throne under the name Victoria.
King Edward VII, Victoria’s eldest son, chose Edward as his regnal title, although he had been known by his first name of Albert.
READ MORE: Prince Charles title: Will Charles change his name when he is King?
Revealed: How Prince Philip ‘never wanted royal title’
In 1936, after the abdication crisis, Prince Albert, Duke of York, assumed the throne as King George VI rather than "King Albert".
His full name was Albert Frederick Arthur George; like Edward VII and Victoria he used another of his names.
There has been speculation the Prince of Wales, whose full name is Charles Philip Arthur George, may elect not to be known as "Charles III”.
This is reportedly out of concern to be compared with Charles II of England, who was known for his Catholic sympathies or Charles I of England, who was executed after the English Civil War.
Instead of becoming King Charles he might choose to become King George VII, King Philip, or King Arthur.
Royal revealtion
Royal revealtion: Prince Charles crowned Prince of Wales by Queen Elizabeth II (Image: GETTY)
Who were the other King Charles?
King Charles I of England
Charles I was born on November 19, 1600, and died in 1649).
He was King of England, King of Scotland, and King of Ireland from March 27, 1625, until his execution in 1649.
DON'T MISS
Prince Andrew family tree: Inside the family of the Queen's son [MAP]
Queen family tree: A FULL look back at the Queen’s HUGE family [INSIGHT]
The bizarre ritual Prince Charles carries out whenever he plants trees [VIDEO]
RELATED ARTICLES
How Prince Charles shares Dracula’s blood line
Prince Philip revelation: Duke's shocking connection to Russia
READ MORE
Prince Harry row: How Queen could control Duke's decisions
Charles was born into the House of Stuart as the second son of King James VI of Scotland, but after his father inherited the English throne in 1603 (as James I), he moved to England, where he spent much of the rest of his life.
He became the heir apparent to the three kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland in 1612 on the death of his elder brother Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales.
After his succession in 1625, Charles clashed with the Parliament of England, which sought to curb his royal prerogative.
King Charles I believed in the divine right of kings, and was determined to govern according to his own conscience.
Royal revelation
Royal revelation: Line of succession to the British throne (Image: EXPRESS)
King Charles II
Charles II was King of England, Scotland and Ireland.
He was king of Scotland from 1649 until his deposition in 1651, and king of England, Scotland and Ireland from the 1660 Restoration of the monarchy until his death.
King Charles II was the eldest surviving child of Charles I of England Scotland and Ireland and Henrietta Maria of France.
TRENDING
Queen heartbreak: Monarch devastated after giving up royal role that 'means a lot to her'
Queen heartbreak: Monarch devastated after giving up royal role that 'means a lot to her'
Royal warning: The one 'worrying' sign to look out for when Queen is out - 'Really bad'
Royal warning: The one 'worrying' sign to look out for when Queen is out - 'Really bad'
Serena Williams insists she has ‘never heard’ of Meghan Markle after ex-royal's LA move
Serena Williams insists she has ‘never heard’ of Meghan Markle after ex-royal's LA move
During Charles II reign, however, England entered the period known as the English Interregnum or the English Commonwealth, and the country was a de facto republic led by Oliver Cromwell.
The King fled to mainland Europe and spent the next nine years in exile in France.
But a political crisis that followed the death of Mr Cromwell in 1658 resulted in the restoration of the monarchy, and Charles was invited to return to Britain.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:09 pm Post subject:
Speculation is growing that the date has been set for the Queen’s retirement. Prince Charles, 71, made a beeline for Sandringham as soon as he touched down in the UK on Wednesday after his New Zealand trip, with reports of discussions entering on the fallout of Prince Andrew’s BBC interview and Charles’s role going forward.
Prince Charles will see change in attitude when King says expert
Speculation is growing that the date has been set for the Queen’s retirement. Prince Charles, 71, made a beeline for Sandringham as soon as he touched down in the UK on Wednesday after his New Zealand trip, with reports of discussions entering on the fallout of Prince Andrew’s BBC interview and Charles’s role going forward.
The Queen will turn 95 in 18 months - the same age at which her husband Philip withdrew from his public duties.
According to royal sources, courtiers behind palace walls are murmuring that she may use the milestone to hand over the day-to-day control of the monarch to Charles, Prince of Wales.
If this manifests, she would likely grant him the title of Prince Regent, while she retains the title of Queen and doesn’t officially abdicate.
Prince William, second in line to the British throne, has warned that exploding populations around the world will put "enormous pressure" on wildlife unless it is properly managed.
"In my lifetime, we have seen global wildlife populations decline by over half," the prince, who is known as the Duke of Cambridge, said at a gala dinner for the Tusk Trust charity in London, the Telegraph reported.
"We are going to have to work much harder," the duke continued, "and think much deeper, if we are to ensure that human beings and the other species of animal with which we share this planet can continue to coexist.
"Africa's rapidly growing human population is predicted to more than double by 2050—a staggering increase of three and a half million people per month.
"There is no question that this increase puts wildlife and habitat under enormous pressure.
"Urbanisation, infrastructure development, cultivation—all good things in themselves, but they will have a terrible impact unless we begin to plan and to take measures now."
RELATED STORIES
Prince William Reveals Lesson He'll Teach Prince George
When Is the Royal Baby Due?
Prince William Should Lose Public Funding: Lawmaker
The duke said new ideas were needed on how to manage water resources and the grazing of animals, in case overcrowding ends up having a "catastrophic effect" on wildlife.
A report from WWF and the Zoological Society of London published in 2016 found that the world was on course to lose two-thirds of its wild animals by 2030, with the destruction of wilderness for agriculture, logging and poaching all major contributing factors, The Guardian reported at the time.
In 2010 William's father, Prince Charles, who is first in line to the British throne, warned that the earth could not "sustain us all," and that "in the next 50 years, we face monumental problems as the figures rocket," according to a separate Telegraph report.
Charles said at the time that "it would certainly help if the acceleration slowed down, but it would also help if the world reduced its desire to consume."
And he praised the success of family planning services: "Interestingly, where the loans are managed by the women of the community, the birth rate has gone down. The impact of these sorts of schemes, of education and the provision of family planning services, has been widespread.
"I fear there is little chance these sorts of schemes can help the plight of many millions of people unless we all face up to the fact more honestly than we do that one of the biggest causes of high birth rates remains cultural," Charles added. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Prince Charles had the Queen and Prince Philip believe they "could not trust him" because of his tendency to be outspoken, the royal biographer claimed. The Prince of Wales has been known to depart from the Royal Family's tendency to remain silent on public issues, becoming an outspoken supporter of the environment and conservationism. But Charles' vocal traits allegedly provoked the "annoyance" of Her Majesty and the Duke of Edinburgh early in their eldest son's career as heir to the throne.
Camilla snub: Duchess blasted for getting 'more airtime' in lockdown
Speaking to the documentary 'The Queen and Prince Charles: Mother and Son,' Ms Levin said: "He annoyed his parents, actually.
"They felt he was weak, they felt they couldn’t trust him to be king, that he had all these funny ideas about spiritualism and plastic in the sea."
Royal historian Dr Kate Williams agreed Charles' outspokenness sparked criticism from the public as members of the Royal Family before him had traditionally tended to stick to a neutral position on most matters.
Dr Williams said: "Increasingly, people started talking about Prince Charles as a bit eccentric.
PROMOTED STORY
Dubai Photos That Will Make You Wonder About Visiting
(The Primary Market)
JUST IN: Meghan Markle ‘working on new project' in US - and long-term fans will be THRILLED
prince charles news queen elizabeth prince philip
Prince Charles allegedly "annoyed" the Queen and Philip with his outspoken behaviour, Levin claimed (Image: GETTY)
prince charles news royal family latest
Prince Charles has long spoken out about his support for the environmentpr (Image: GETTY)
"There are cartoons of him talking to his plants, and thinking too much about his plants."
Prince Charles has spoken on several occasions about his concerns for the environment and earlier this year met with environmental activist Greta Thunberg during the World Economic Forum to discuss her campaign.
Through the years, the Prince of Wales has launched several initiatives aimed at making the world become more sustainable.
But his positions have at times sparked backlash because of his direct involvement with the political sphere.
READ MORE: Meghan Markle STILL using Sussex Royal despite Queen banning it
Queen thinks ‘very highly’ of Camilla claims expert
Play Video
prince charles queen elizabeth ii prince philip royal family latest
The Queen and Prince Philip were concerned about Charles' behaviour, according to Levin (Image: GETTY)
prince charles news prince william prince harry latest news
Prince Charles passed on his passion to his sons, William and Harry (Image: GETTY)
The Prince of Wales attempted for several years to prevent the publication of the so-called "black spider memos" he sent to several members of Cabinet and MPs over the years.
The memos revealed Prince Charles had raised several issues, including affordable rural housing and public health, with members of Government during the years.
The release opened the Prince up to criticism suggesting he was meddling in politics – damaging the royal household’s neutrality.
However, Clarence House defended Charles’ intervention, noting the correspondence showed "the range of the Prince of Wales' concerns and interests for this country and the wider world".
DON’T MISS
Real reason behind William’s struggles with Beatrice and Eugenie [INSIGHT]
Charles backlash: Plan for new honour slapped down - ‘Not the time’ [ANALYSIS]
The sad reason Queen would rather be away from Philip right now [ROYAL]
RELATED ARTICLES
The subtle way Princess Charlotte photos pay tribute to Queen
Queen forced to keep composure during life changing event
prince charles news royal family tree uk
Prince Charles is first in line to the British throne (Image: EXPRESS.CO,UK)
TRENDING
Real reason behind William’s struggles with Beatrice and Eugenie: ‘Diana was link!’
Real reason behind William’s struggles with Beatrice and Eugenie: ‘Diana was link!’
How Princess Margaret’s husband took ‘drastic action to escape her’ exposed
How Princess Margaret’s husband took ‘drastic action to escape her’ exposed
Prince Charles’s ‘annoyed’ Queen and Prince Philip with ‘un-royal’ trait, expert claims
Prince Charles’s ‘annoyed’ Queen and Prince Philip with ‘un-royal’ trait, expert claims
In a statement released following the publication of the memos said: “The letters published by the Government show the Prince of Wales expressing concern about issues that he has raised in public like affordable rural housing, the quality of hospital food, the preservation and regeneration of historic buildings, an integrated approach to healthcare, climate change, and others.
"In all these cases, the Prince of Wales is raising issues of public concern, and trying to find practical ways to address the issues."
And Prince Charles' outspokenness has since appeared to have been passed on to both his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry.
Both princes have not shied away from discussing the impact the tragic death of their mother Diana in their teenage years had on their mental health.
Queen will make VE Day broadcast ‘very personal’ claims expert
Play Video
Sign up for FREE now and never miss the top Royal stories again!
SUBSCRIBE
We will use your email address only for sending you newsletters. Please see our Privacy Notice for details of your data protection rights.
The Queen is the longest reigning British monarch, having sat on the throne for 68 years. She promised upon her 21st birthday that she would dedicate her whole life to the throne, claiming she would “be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family”. However, after Prince Philip retired in 2017, royal fans began to speculate that the Queen could follow suit now that she is 94.
RELATED ARTICLES
How Charles’ love for Camilla left partner furious — it wasn't Diana
Shock claim 'paranoia gene' impacted Duke's relationship with Beatrice
To do this, she would have to pass the crown to her heir, the 71-year-old Prince Charles, in an unprecedented move not seen since the abdication of Edward VIII in 1936.
Yet, royal documentary-maker Nick Bullen told the Daily Mail back in 2018 that “abdication will never happen”.
He explained: “I think the Queen sees what those boys and their wives bring, I also wonder whether she even throws forward to the great grandchildren.
PROMOTED STORY
Limited Time Offer: Get A Discount On Your First Four HelloFresh Boxes!
Limited Time Offer: Get A Discount On Your First Four HelloFresh Boxes!
(HelloFresh)
“Princess Charlotte, already at the age of 3, knows how to work a crowd.
Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Charlotte
Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Charlotte (Image: Getty)
William, Kate, George, Charlotte and Louis clapping for carers in their Norfolk residence
William, Kate, George, Charlotte and Louis clapping for carers in their Norfolk residence (Image: Getty)
“Maybe now through her grandchildren she can see a way of just staying on the crest of that wave.”
Mr Bullen added: “Her mother lived to 101.
“The Queen is there for the long run…. She could live for at least another 10 years.
“She’s seen it all, she’s done it all, she is the ultimate working mother and working woman and I don’t think she’s going anywhere, anytime soon.”
READ MORE: Why Princess Diana ‘lacked discipline Royal Family expected'
Princess Charlotte and the Queen: The Queen is said to be very pleased with the popularity of the younger generation
Princess Charlotte and the Queen: The Queen is said to be very pleased with the popularity of the younger generation (Image: Getty)
RELATED ARTICLES
Royal heartbreak: How Prince Charles confessed his ‘obsession’
Real reason Diana wanted to marry Charles before romance even began
Royal insiders have indicated in the past that if the Queen reaches 95, she may consider bringing the Regency Act into force, which would allow Charles effectively to reign while she lives.
The monarch has indeed been steadily handing over more duties to the other senior royals, and in 2017 Charles became the Queen’s successor as Head of the Commonwealth.
Additionally, Marie Claire pointed out last year how one particular photograph may have suggested the Queen was clearing the way for Charles to take over.
DON'T MISS
Kate Middleton's prophetic comment about Prince William exposed [INSIGHT]
Kate Middleton: How Palace ‘worried about a repeat of Diana’ [EXPLAINED]
Lord Mountbatten’s true intention for heir to throne exposed [REVEALED]
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge with their children and the Duchess of Cornwall
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge with their children and the Duchess of Cornwall (Image: Getty)
The Queen leans down to George at Charlotte's christening in July 2015
The Queen leans down to George at Charlotte's christening in July 2015 (Image: Getty)
The article read: “The monarch wasn’t featured in Prince Charles’ official 70th birthday photographs, supposedly [meaning the Queen was] stepping back for him to lead the family.”
For the Prince of Wales’ landmark birthday, he was pictured surrounded by the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the Duchess of Cornwall and his three grandchildren.
His fourth and youngest grandchild, Archie, had not yet been born – he turned one today – and the Queen was also absent from the picture.
Yet Marie Claire also suggested that Charlotte could have influenced the Queen’s decision not to abdicate in another way, aside from her popularity.
The Queen and Princess Charlotte: Line of succession to the British throne
The Queen and Princess Charlotte: Line of succession to the British throne (Image: Express.co.uk)
TRENDING
Prince Charles ‘annoyed’ Queen and Prince Philip with ‘un-royal’ trait, expert claims
Prince Charles ‘annoyed’ Queen and Prince Philip with ‘un-royal’ trait, expert claims
Queen forced to put foot down after Charles' public skirmish amid royal break up
Queen forced to put foot down after Charles' public skirmish amid royal break up
As Charles’ second eldest grandchild, she is fourth in the line of succession, and the next female.
Her 2015 birth was particularly important because she was the first female royal to be put above her younger male siblings in order of precedence after the 2013 Succession to the Crown Act.
In the past, male heirs were always set to inherit first before the females, whereas now it is arranged strictly by age. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:28 am Post subject: Re: 21Apr21 When Queen retires at 95 will all hell break loo
Great Film
Charles shamelessly meddling with YouTube too
As if to emphasise the point?
TonyGosling wrote:
Former headline - When the Queen dies will all hell break loose?
This country has been ruled by ostensibly Christian monarchs for a long long time. Since A.D. 290 many people agree "Good King Lucius" was the man. That makes about 1700 years.
The pagan modus operandi revolved around nature worship and idol worship, types of religious practice which fall somewhere between superstitious and malign. Malign because nature's only law is survival of the fittest, the law of the jungle. The weak must perish in a Dawkins world-view and this goes against our better nature, unless we are control freak types who want to die having left the world in a worse state than when they were born.
He is committed to elitism and rejection of Christ and ushering in of a man-made religion which will synthesize all religions into one. Who will then know what is right and what is wrong? This is Deism and that means that whoever's in charge decides right from wrong. We've already seen Charles disregard the law and have a civil not a church marriage to Camilla. It was notorious Lord Chancellor Charles Falconer, who delivered this verdict for Charles who got married despite eleven objections.
Tha press in this county know that Charles is ruthless and aquiring more land and wealth by the minute. He operates a well-staffed 24/7 spin machine which cleverly pushes the Prince of Wales' line right across the press. His office can, and does, destroy peoples' careers. He is the one responsible for the near decade of delays in the Diana inquest and the attempts to pull the recent Channel 4 documentary from our TV screens.
On a recent visit to Tetbury in Gloucestershire, where Charles and Diana lived at Highgrove, I was struck by the polite animosity of locals to the Prince, and their assertions that Diana 'got a raw deal'. She was committed to bringing William and Harry up to be like ordinary people rather than royalty, at least to have a good idea what ordinary people are really like, for example by cycling into Tetbury with the boys without security guards for shopping or attending church on Sunday.
She ingrained into the boys that they need never fear ordinary people and Charles, whether he turns out to be the Antichrist or not, will find the wonderful upbringing she gave them almost impossible to erase.
So when Elizabeth II dies, the pretence of Christ's guiding the nation will disappear and a great divisive battle for the nation's spirit will commence.
postscript
Bob Satchwell: I think that there is a difference in that most people, even newspaper editors or journalists don't have a constitutional position. It all sounds a little bit sad to me. First of all, the Prince of Wales I think, by being advised to go to court this way has brought upon himself much more of a problem than he had in the first place. But secondly, the idea that the Prince of Wales will share his political views, whatever they might be, with a small group of people smacks of something certainly from the 19th Century, probably even back before that, when a small group of courtiers could know what the heir to the throne was thinking but the public were not allowed. And I think that's really rather sad.
PRINCE CHARLES has previously allowed Kate and William to spend time at his Birkhall home with the Duchess' parents Carole and Michael - but the invitations came to an abrupt stop, according to a member of Charles' inner circle.
By ABBIE LLEWELYN
PUBLISHED: 00:02, Thu, May 21, 2020 | UPDATED: 17:03, Thu, May 21, 2020
Middleton family 'actively' involved in raising Prince George
Birkhall is on the Balmoral estate in Aberdeenshire and originally belonged to the Queen Mother, but was inherited by Charles. The Prince of Wales and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, like to retreat there for country pursuits like fishing and shooting. However, on occasion he lends it to other members of the family and in the past he even lent the use of his ghillies – someone who acts as an attendant on a hunt or fishing expedition – so the visiting Middletons could enjoy a shooting weekend with Kate and William.
RELATED ARTICLES
Princess Charlotte’s cheeky response to William’s request exposed
Real Reason’ Queen Elizabeth II gets on with Carole Middleton exposed
For example, in 2010 shortly before the engagement was announced, the Middletons were seen receiving instructions in shooting ahead of a day’s stalking in the Balmoral hills.
This indicated that the normal, middle-class family were being taught to fit in with the leisure activities enjoyed by the royals.
It was all part of a “country pursuits” house party that William hosted annually.
A source told the Daily Mail at the time: “William and Kate do go up to Balmoral quite a bit, but inviting her parents is a big deal. This is virtually confirmation they’re his in-laws-to-be.
PROMOTED STORY
Why You Should Stop Drinking £5 Wine
Why You Should Stop Drinking £5 Wine
(Naked Wines)
READ MORE: Prince Charles' 'Battle Royal' with Carole Middleton over George
prince charles carole middleton michael
Prince Charles stopped inviting the Middletons to Birkhall (Image: GETTY)
birkhall
Charles and the Queen outside Birkhall (Image: GETTY)
“Carole must be absolutely ecstatic. She’s finally made it right inside the royal circle.”
This was not the only visit either, in fact Carole has visited the Scottish estate as recently as 2014.
However, according to a 2016 article in the Daily Mail, growing tension brewed between Charles and the Middletons over time spent with their mutual grandchildren.
According to royal expert Katie Nicholl, the prince believed Carole and Michael get “more than their fair share” of time with Prince George.
william kate george charlotte
William, Kate, George, Charlotte and Louis (Image: GETTY)
RELATED ARTICLES
Prince Philip ‘gave Princess Diana final ultimatum’ in furious row
Kate Middleton and William ‘dispensed with’ swathes of royal protocol
In retaliation, it seems, the Middletons received fewer invitations to royal events and to Birkhall.
One of Charles’ circle said: “At the moment, there’s no talk of them going [to Birkhall].
“[Charles] wants to see his son and daughter-in-law and spend time with his grandchildren alone.
“He has always wanted to mentor George, who is, after all, the heir to the throne, and sees it very much as his role.
DON'T MISS
Royal Family unmasked: How royals ‘can’t manage without’ 1000 servants [INSIGHT]
Awkward moment Princess Anne squirmed when asked about divorce [VIDEO]
Princess Diana ‘crossed invisible lines’ with taboo staff relationship [REVEALED]
prince william kate middleton
William and Kate have been video calling during the pandemic (Image: GETTY)
“He will always insist the grandchildren come to Scotland so that they can learn to shoot, hunt and fish.
“That’s very important to Charles. He wishes the family would do more traditional things like holiday in Scotland.”
All this was reportedly the result of a feud branded the “Battle Royal”, in which Charles apparently raged: “They never let me see my grandson”.
He even tried to entice William and Kate to spend more time with him by refurbishing a treehouse in the Highgrove garden for the children, and installing a £20,000 shepherd’s hut in the wildflower meadow.
Carole Middleton and son James arrive at Will and Kate's wedding
Play Video
However, both the treehouse and hut have been sadly empty, as the visits to Highgrove are few and far between.
This is partly due to how busy both Charles and the Cambrdiges are – conflicting schedules means it is hard for them to fit in quality time together.
The Middletons on the other hand have a lot of free time and can work around when the family is free, and even take on some of the childcare responsibilities when William and Kate are busy on engagements overseas, for example.
Carole was said to be “devastated” to find out that Charles felt this way.
prince charles camilla palace
Michael, Carole, Charles and Camilla on the balcony (Image: GETTY)
TRENDING
Prince Edward title: How Earl of Wessex will take on dukedom in honour of Philip
Prince Edward title: How Earl of Wessex will take on dukedom in honour of Philip
Royal heartbreak: Queen's mother-in-law 'burst into tears' after Prince Andrew's wedding
Royal heartbreak: Queen's mother-in-law 'burst into tears' after Prince Andrew's wedding
Meghan and Harry safety concerns: Bodyguard warns 'something catastrophic' could go wrong
Meghan and Harry safety concerns: Bodyguard warns 'something catastrophic' could go wrong
A friend told Ms Nicholl: “All she had ever wanted is to be a good mother and grandmother, not upset anyone in the process.
“Perhaps their low profile is their way of keeping a respectful distance.”
QUEEN ELIZABETH II could abdicate the throne and pave the way for Prince Charles as early as next year, according to royal biographer Angela Levin.
By CLAIRE ANDERSON
PUBLISHED: 13:30, Mon, Aug 10, 2020 | UPDATED: 13:31, Mon, Aug 10, 2020
The Queen, 94, became the longest-reigning British monarch in 2015 as she surpassed the reign of her great-great-grandmother Victoria. But after a turbulent start to the year and the coronavirus pandemic, speculation over whether she will step down has grown. Speaking to Channel 5 documentary 'The Queen and Charles - Mother and Son', Ms Levin said there were rumours the Queen would step down from duties at 95.
The documentary's narrator Stephen Greif said: "Some royal experts think that the Queen's age may eventually force her to step down from her day to day duties as monarch.
"Charles would become Prince Regent, King in all but name."
Ms Levin added: "If the monarch is incapable of doing her duties then the heir can take over and do all the duties the monarch can't do.
"There were rumours that the Queen might stand down when she's 95 - but actually she seems so strong and confident she might just carry on."
READ MORE: Queen fury: Monarch forced to step in to stop Meghan Markle
Queen Elizabeth II
The Queen could abdicate the throne and pave the way for Prince Charles as early as next year (Image: GETTY)
Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip
The Queen, 94, became the longest-reigning British Monarch in 2015 (Image: GETTY)
Many royal experts believe the Queen won't step down.
Dr Anne Whitelock, a royal historian, told Channel 5 documentary, 'The Queen: Duty before Family?': "There is much speculation that the Queen might one day have to abdicate.
"I think there is no chance of the Queen abdicating.
"As she said at 21, whether her life short of long she remains committed to serving her people."
Queen Elizabeth II
The Queen had a turbulent start to the year (Image: PA)
Queen has 'close relationship with William and Harry' says expert
Play Video
Dr Whitelock noted: "The Queen would be very sensitive to the very personal costs that these crisis' have caused.
"She simply has a sense of duty and needing to ultimately trump personal difficulty and personal emotion."
The insight comes as the Queen travelled to Balmoral Castle for summer.
THE QUEEN has 'no plans to abdicate' and is set to continue her historic reign for the sake of her grandchildren, sources say.
By LUKE HAWKER
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Tue, Nov 17, 2020
The Queen, 94, is the longest-reigning monarch in British history and has been on the throne for the past 68 years. Retirement plans for her majesty have once again surfaced in recent months, with a number of royal biographers claiming she could hand over power to her son Prince Charles as early as next year.
TRENDING
Royal Family LIVE: Palace popularity reshuffle as Queen hit by blow - and Meghan relegated
Royal Family LIVE: Palace popularity reshuffle as Queen hit by blow - and Meghan relegated
Warren Buffett says Princess Diana told him who she considered ‘the sexiest man alive’
Warren Buffett says Princess Diana told him who she considered ‘the sexiest man alive’
Meghan Markle and Harry break major royal protocol with politician meeting - leaked memo
Meghan Markle and Harry break major royal protocol with politician meeting - leaked memo
But, this week senior aides told the Daily Express any plans for the Queen to step down are premature and they expect her to remain as head of state until death.
The Government has also outlined plans for her majesty’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations despite being more than 18 months away.
Prior to becoming Queen, Princess Elizabeth famously dedicated her life to her future role as monarch.
Speaking on her 21st birthday, she said: "I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong."
queen
The Queen is the longest reigning British monarch (Image: GETTY/PA)
The Queen
The Queen has been head of state for the past 68 years (Image: GETTY)
Addressing further speculation, a royal adviser said: “We’ve always pointed people to the declaration she made to serve the country for all of her life.”
A second aide added: “There are no plans for a Regency. There are no discussions that I am aware of relating to a Regency.
“It’s entirely up to the Queen how she asks other members of the family to support her in her work.”
Another royal insider believes the youngest members of the Royal Family could hold a significant influence on the Queen’s decision.
Prince Charles
Prince Charles is the next-in-line to the throne (Image: GETTY)
RELATED ARTICLES
Queen praises 'lack of drama' surrounding William and Kate
Royal Family LIVE: Queen desperate to raise cash after financial loss
The Monarch has eight grandchildren and eight great-grandchildren and a source has suggested the fourth-in-line to the throne Princess Charlotte – has in particular given the Queen another reason to continue.
Speaking to the Daily Mail last year, they said: “I don’t think she’s going anywhere, anytime soon.
“I think the Queen sees what those boys and their wives bring… Princess Charlotte, already at the age of three, knows how to work a crowd.
"Maybe now through her grandchildren she can see a way of just staying on the crest of that wave."
READ MORE: Boris on brink of CAVING to EU demands now Cummings has left No. 10
Princess Charlotte
Princess Charlotte is fourth-in-line to the throne (Image: GETTY)
The Queen became the UK's longest-serving monarch on September 9, 2015.
She surpassed the 63 years, seven months and two day-long reign of her great-great-grandmother Queen Victoria.
Earlier this month, Royal biographer Robert Jobson said he expects the Queen to end her reign when she turns 95-year-old in 2021.
The Queen will celebrate her birthday on April 21 – with the special occasion traditionally marked with a Trooping of the Colour service in June.
Heads together: the Queen takes her religious role very seriously
In pictures: Charles and Camilla
The Queen has let it be known that the reason she will not be attending the wedding of the Prince of Wales is because she is putting her duties as the head of the Church of England before family feelings....
LONDON: I had to put Church before Charles, says the Queen
I had to put Church before Charles, says the Queen
By Andrew Alderson, Chief Reporter
THE TELEGRAPH
LONDON (4/3/2005)--The Queen has let it be known that the reason she will not be attending the wedding of the Prince of Wales is because she is putting her duties as the head of the Church of England before family feelings.
Heads together: the Queen takes her religious role very seriously She has told a friend that she feels it incompatible with her role as Supreme Governor of the Church to attend a civil marriage ceremony, particularly one involving the heir to the throne. She does not want to set a precedent that could damage the Church of England.
"I am not able to go. I do not feel that my position [as Supreme Governor of the Church] permits it," the Queen told her friend. Until now, it has been unclear why the Queen declined to attend the wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles in Windsor on Friday.
It has been widely reported that the Queen would boycott the ceremony in the Guildhall because she did not want to attend a humiliating "town hall" service, but the real reason can now be revealed.
The Queen privately disapproves of the 33-year on-off relationship between Prince Charles and Mrs Parker Bowles and feels that her eldest son has put personal concerns before duty. The Queen's friend told The Telegraph that Her Majesty had been disappointed that her decision not to attend the wedding had been portrayed as a "snub" to the couple when this is not the case. "The Queen feels she has to put her role with the Church before her role as a mother," said the friend.
A senior royal official said: "The Queen takes her position as Supreme Governor of the Church of England incredibly seriously. She also has great personal faith."
Three senior courtiers told The Telegraph this weekend that the Queen had already informed Prince Charles that she would not be attending the civil ceremony even when he planned to hold it within Windsor Castle. The venue was switched in late February because of problems with using the castle.
One senior royal aide said: "The venue was never the issue for the Queen. The civil nature of the service is the issue. She did not feel it was appropriate for her to attend."
The Queen is attending the later service of dedication conducted by Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury. She is also hosting a wedding reception for more than 700 guests.
Royal officials do not believe that the Queen has ever attended a civil wedding service during her 53-year reign. It is also believed to be the first time that an heir to the throne has been married in a civil service. Some constitutional lawyers have questioned whether it is legal.
The explanation from Buckingham Palace about the non-attendance of the Queen and Prince Philip is that Prince Charles and Mrs Parker Bowles wanted a "low-key" ceremony. This has always been unconvincing, particularly after it was announced that the Princess Royal, the Duke of York and the Earl of Wessex would attend. One senior royal aide said that the Queen felt it would be undignified to spell out in a public statement her personal reasons for not attending the wedding. It might also be seen as implied criticism of Prince Charles, who will be the next Supreme Governor of the Church of England when he becomes king.
Hugo Vickers, a prolific author on the Royal Family who is writing a biography of the late Queen Mother, said that the Queen had never, to his knowledge, attended a civil ceremony.
"She is quite right not to attend - she is the head of the Church of England, after all. It never occurred to me that she would attend the register office ceremony and when people talk about it being a snub, it's nonsense. A snub is when no member of the Royal Family attended the marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor in Paris in 1937."
The Queen attended the second marriage of Princess Anne to Cdr Tim Laurence at Craithie Church, near Balmoral, in 1992 because it was held within the Church of Scotland, which had more relaxed rules on divorcés marrying in church. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Prince Charles' hopes of a multi-faith coronation suffered a blow when the Church of England asserted the historic importance of a solely Christian service when he becomes King.
In a rebuke to the Prince's hopes of inviting Muslims, Hindus and others to take an equal role in Westminster Abbey, the Church declared that Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams will design the coronation service.
The highly unusual statement was the Church's first official pronouncement on how the coronation will be handled and it comes amid intensifying controversy over the role of non-Christian faiths and non-Anglican Christian denominations.
Charles has long made clear his yearning for a ceremony in which Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Sikh beliefs take a place alongside the doctrines of the Church of England.
ADVERTISING
Dr Williams, however, has insisted that the Prince must restrain his interest in other faiths and stay within the 'constitutional framework' that makes him Supreme Governor of the Church of England.
The intervention from the Church made plain that Charles will be on his own if he tries to introduce other faiths into the religious coronation service at the Abbey.
The Church's leading lay official, General Synod Secretary General William Fittall said yesterday: 'The coronation service is conducted by the Archbishop of Canterbury, whose duty this has normally been since 1066.
"He, consequently, takes the lead in preparing the order of service for the approval of the sovereign."
Mr Fittall, a former senior civil servant at the Home Office who has led the CofE bureaucracy for four years, delivered his statement in reply to a request from a Synod member to 'clarify who decides the form of the next coronation service".
✕
The statement follows remarks by two leading Anglican prelates in the past few days on the importance of the Christian monarchy.
Earlier this week, Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu told the Daily Mail that "the Church of England reminds the nation that in this country the Queen is Defender of the Faith, head of the Commonwealth and head of state."
ADVERTISING
He said of the relationship between Church and monarch: "You change it at your peril".
Dr Sentamu's comments came in the wake of an interview given at the beginning of the month by Bishop of Rochester Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, who said that "the coronation service is singularly Christian in its form" and added that the Prince's duty is to defend 'the historic faith of our Church".
Dr Sentamu, who is number two in the CofE hierarchy, and Dr Nazir-Ali are the two leading foreign-born bishops in the Church. It may not be coincidental that the Archbishop of York, from Uganda, and the Bishop of Rochester, from Pakistan, come from parts of the world where Christianity is under heavy pressure from Islam.
The official confirmation of Dr William's lead role in the service yesterday added weight to the growing view that the Prince will be compelled to accept a traditional and solely Anglican coronation.
Other faiths will get a look in only at a subsequent and symbolically less important event to be arranged later.
An article in the Spectator magazine last month said Charles wants a second ceremony at Westminster Hall, inside the Palace of Westminster, which would admit Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Sikh beliefs alongside those of non-Anglican Christians. This would be held at a later date.
The Prince, who will take the title Defender of the Faith when he becomes King, said 12 years ago that he wished to be seen rather as a Defender of Faith.
His push for a shift to a multi-faith monarchy alarmed many churchmen and politicians who saw it undermining both longstanding constitutional practice and the monarch's position as Supreme Governor of the Church.
Charles is said to be determined to have a 'focused and telecentric' coronation that reflects a new era and a new kind of reign.
But Dr Williams delivered a warning against undermining the Christian monarchy when he went to Lambeth Palace nearly four years ago.
The Archbishop said early in 2003: "I am glad the Prince of Wales takes faith communities as seriously as he does but the actual title, there is a historical, constitutional framework for it which you don't just change by fiat."
Constitutional historian Professor Anthony Glees welcomed the Church's assertion of its role.
"I am pleased that the Church is drawing attention to the importance of Christianity in the coronation, which of course we all hope will be a long time coming," he said.
"We should remember Winston Churchill's "finest hour" speech in 1940, in which he said the Battle of Britain was about to begin and that on it depended "the survival of Christian civilisation".
"The reminder that this is a Christian country will be welcomed by many who fought to preserve it and those who remember them. They will be glad that the Archbishop of Canterbury has taken the point."
Some Christian groups remain unhappy that the Prince is thought to be considering a multi-faith event to follow the coronation.
Colin Hart of the Christian Institute think tank said: "There are huge obstacles to a multi-faith coronation service and the constitution would unravel if Charles tried to do something different.
"But I find it bizarre that he intends to take a Christian coronation oath and then stage a second ceremony at which he will declare loyalty to other faiths. That appears to be breaking his oath."
Whitehall_Bin_Men wrote:
I had to put Church before Charles, says the Queen
Heads together: the Queen takes her religious role very seriously
In pictures: Charles and Camilla
The Queen has let it be known that the reason she will not be attending the wedding of the Prince of Wales is because she is putting her duties as the head of the Church of England before family feelings....
LONDON: I had to put Church before Charles, says the Queen
I had to put Church before Charles, says the Queen
By Andrew Alderson, Chief Reporter
THE TELEGRAPH
LONDON (4/3/2005)--The Queen has let it be known that the reason she will not be attending the wedding of the Prince of Wales is because she is putting her duties as the head of the Church of England before family feelings.
Heads together: the Queen takes her religious role very seriously She has told a friend that she feels it incompatible with her role as Supreme Governor of the Church to attend a civil marriage ceremony, particularly one involving the heir to the throne. She does not want to set a precedent that could damage the Church of England.
"I am not able to go. I do not feel that my position [as Supreme Governor of the Church] permits it," the Queen told her friend. Until now, it has been unclear why the Queen declined to attend the wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles in Windsor on Friday.
It has been widely reported that the Queen would boycott the ceremony in the Guildhall because she did not want to attend a humiliating "town hall" service, but the real reason can now be revealed.
The Queen privately disapproves of the 33-year on-off relationship between Prince Charles and Mrs Parker Bowles and feels that her eldest son has put personal concerns before duty. The Queen's friend told The Telegraph that Her Majesty had been disappointed that her decision not to attend the wedding had been portrayed as a "snub" to the couple when this is not the case. "The Queen feels she has to put her role with the Church before her role as a mother," said the friend.
A senior royal official said: "The Queen takes her position as Supreme Governor of the Church of England incredibly seriously. She also has great personal faith."
Three senior courtiers told The Telegraph this weekend that the Queen had already informed Prince Charles that she would not be attending the civil ceremony even when he planned to hold it within Windsor Castle. The venue was switched in late February because of problems with using the castle.
One senior royal aide said: "The venue was never the issue for the Queen. The civil nature of the service is the issue. She did not feel it was appropriate for her to attend."
The Queen is attending the later service of dedication conducted by Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury. She is also hosting a wedding reception for more than 700 guests.
Royal officials do not believe that the Queen has ever attended a civil wedding service during her 53-year reign. It is also believed to be the first time that an heir to the throne has been married in a civil service. Some constitutional lawyers have questioned whether it is legal.
The explanation from Buckingham Palace about the non-attendance of the Queen and Prince Philip is that Prince Charles and Mrs Parker Bowles wanted a "low-key" ceremony. This has always been unconvincing, particularly after it was announced that the Princess Royal, the Duke of York and the Earl of Wessex would attend. One senior royal aide said that the Queen felt it would be undignified to spell out in a public statement her personal reasons for not attending the wedding. It might also be seen as implied criticism of Prince Charles, who will be the next Supreme Governor of the Church of England when he becomes king.
Hugo Vickers, a prolific author on the Royal Family who is writing a biography of the late Queen Mother, said that the Queen had never, to his knowledge, attended a civil ceremony.
"She is quite right not to attend - she is the head of the Church of England, after all. It never occurred to me that she would attend the register office ceremony and when people talk about it being a snub, it's nonsense. A snub is when no member of the Royal Family attended the marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor in Paris in 1937."
The Queen attended the second marriage of Princess Anne to Cdr Tim Laurence at Craithie Church, near Balmoral, in 1992 because it was held within the Church of Scotland, which had more relaxed rules on divorcés marrying in church.
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
The Queen has let it be known that the reason she will not be attending the wedding of the Prince of Wales is because she is putting her duties as the head of the Church of England before family feelings.
She has told a friend that she feels it incompatible with her role as Supreme Governor of the Church to attend a civil marriage ceremony, particularly one involving the heir to the throne. She does not want to set a precedent that could damage the Church of England.
"I am not able to go. I do not feel that my position [as Supreme Governor of the Church] permits it," the Queen told her friend. Until now, it has been unclear why the Queen declined to attend the wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles in Windsor on Friday.
It has been widely reported that the Queen would boycott the ceremony in the Guildhall because she did not want to attend a humiliating "town hall" service, but the real reason can now be revealed.
The Queen privately disapproves of the 33-year on-off relationship between Prince Charles and Mrs Parker Bowles and feels that her eldest son has put personal concerns before duty. The Queen's friend told The Telegraph that Her Majesty had been disappointed that her decision not to attend the wedding had been portrayed as a "snub" to the couple when this is not the case. "The Queen feels she has to put her role with the Church before her role as a mother," said the friend.
A senior royal official said: "The Queen takes her position as Supreme Governor of the Church of England incredibly seriously. She also has great personal faith."
Three senior courtiers told The Telegraph this weekend that the Queen had already informed Prince Charles that she would not be attending the civil ceremony even when he planned to hold it within Windsor Castle. The venue was switched in late February because of problems with using the castle.
One senior royal aide said: "The venue was never the issue for the Queen. The civil nature of the service is the issue. She did not feel it was appropriate for her to attend."
The Queen is attending the later service of dedication conducted by Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury. She is also hosting a wedding reception for more than 700 guests.
Royal officials do not believe that the Queen has ever attended a civil wedding service during her 53-year reign. It is also believed to be the first time that an heir to the throne has been married in a civil service. Some constitutional lawyers have questioned whether it is legal.
The explanation from Buckingham Palace about the non-attendance of the Queen and Prince Philip is that Prince Charles and Mrs Parker Bowles wanted a "low-key" ceremony. This has always been unconvincing, particularly after it was announced that the Princess Royal, the Duke of York and the Earl of Wessex would attend. One senior royal aide said that the Queen felt it would be undignified to spell out in a public statement her personal reasons for not attending the wedding. It might also be seen as implied criticism of Prince Charles, who will be the next Supreme Governor of the Church of England when he becomes king.
Hugo Vickers, a prolific author on the Royal Family who is writing a biography of the late Queen Mother, said that the Queen had never, to his knowledge, attended a civil ceremony.
"She is quite right not to attend - she is the head of the Church of England, after all. It never occurred to me that she would attend the register office ceremony and when people talk about it being a snub, it's nonsense. A snub is when no member of the Royal Family attended the marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor in Paris in 1937."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sun Feb 20, 2022 9:30 pm Post subject:
Not looking Good For Prince Charles - criminal investigation into his selling honours and passports to a saudi billionaire in exchange for him paying to refurbish his Dumfries House palace
Prince’s Foundation middleman says in 2014 he attended talk about award for billionaire donor
Prince Charles
Clarence House has said Prince Charles had no knowledge of allegations of offers of honours. Photograph: Kirsty O’Connor/AFP/Getty Images
Jon Ungoed-Thomas
Sun 20 Feb 2022 09.15 GMT
A businessman involved in arranging donations for Prince Charles’s charitable ventures has confirmed how a 30-minute meeting at Clarence House helped secure an honorary CBE for a Saudi billionaire, which is now at the centre of a police investigation.
Michael Wynne-Parker, who acted as a middleman for donations for the Prince’s Foundation, attended a meeting in September 2014 with Royal aide Michael Fawcett. A key topic of the meeting was the ambition of securing an honour for the Saudi billionaire and charity donor Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz.
Wynne-Parker, 76, said he entered Clarence House, the official residence of Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall, by a rear entrance and was ushered into a small office for a meeting attended by Fawcett, then chief executive of the Prince’s Foundation.
William Bortrick, a society fixer who was helping Mahfouz, and an official at Dumfries House, a historic country house in Scotland which is one of Prince Charles’s key projects, were also at the meeting.
The agenda was forging the links between Mahfouz and Dumfries House, part of the Prince’s Foundation, according to notes of the meeting revealed last year by the Sunday Times. It was also a logistics meeting on how best to secure an honour for Mahfouz, who was a major donor for Dumfries House.
Within six months, a nomination was submitted to the Foreign Office for the honorary award for a foreign national. In November 2016, Mahfouz was given the honour in a private investiture at Buckingham Palace.
“It was amazing,” said Wynne-Parker. “I was shocked when I suddenly saw the reality later. They acted very quickly, as always is usual with Fawcett. I wasn’t surprised in one sense because of what seemed like Fawcett’s magical powers.”
Clarence House has said Charles had no knowledge of allegations of offers of honours on the condition or basis that donations were made to his charitable projects.
Dumfries House in East Ayrshire, the headquarters of The Prince’s Foundation.
Dumfries House in East Ayrshire, part of the Prince’s Foundation. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA
In August 2017, Fawcett wrote to an aide of Mahfouz offering to try to help him secure a knighthood and British citizenship, in addition to the award he had already received. The letter said the assistance was being offered “in light of the ongoing and most recent generosity of His Excellency”.
The meeting at Clarence House, the subsequent arrangements around the awarding of the CBE and the offer to try to secure a knighthood are likely to form key parts of the investigation announced by the Metropolitan Police last week into alleged offences under the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925.
Wynne-Parker said there was a long tradition of charitable donors receiving honours. He said he was not aware and had no knowledge of Mahfouz being offered an honour on the condition of giving donations.
He said: “There was nothing inherently wrong with what happened. If people have got spare cash and they want to give it to a charity and they get a gong, there’s nothing wrong with it.”
Christopher Sallon QC, a barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, said an offence would be committed under the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925 where there was a formal agreement or an understanding between the parties that an honour would be provided in exchange for a donation. The maximum sentence under the act is two years’ imprisonment and/or a £500 fine.
He said there was a high evidential bar for a successful prosecution. He said: “There must be an agreement or understanding between the parties or at least an attempt by one party to obtain a reward in exchange for an honour or an offer by another part to give such an award.”
Norman Baker, the former Liberal Democrat MP, whose complaint in September last year triggered the police inquiry, said he considered there was a prima facie case to be investigated based on the August 2017 letter which was first revealed by the Mail on Sunday. He said: “The whole honours system now needs to be tightened up.”
Fawcett resigned last year as chief executive of the Prince’s Foundation. An independent investigation commissioned by the charity found evidence that co-ordination took place between Fawcett and others regarding honours nominations. It said there was no evidence trustees were aware of these communications.
Prince Charles has visited the house at the centre of allegations an aide offered to fix a knighthood and U.K. citizenship for a Saudi billionaire.
Michael Fawcett resigned for the third time after allegations in two U.K. newspapers that he offered honours in exchange for donations to Dumfries House, in Scotland.
Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz donated £1.5 million ($2.1 million) to help restoration projects, including for the historic architectural jewel, built in the 1750s by renowned Scottish neoclassicist master architect Robert Adam.
Charles visited the house where he and wife Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, unveiled a knitted art installation which hangs from a bridge.
The event was somewhat more quaint than the allegations that lurk in the background to the royal engagement.
Private correspondence was published in The Sunday Times at the weekend questioning whether Fawcett secured Mahfouz's donations with the promise of help getting a CBE, awarded in 2016 by Charles personally.
The Mail on Sunday also printed a letter sent by Fawcett on August 17, 2017, to an aide to Mahfouz.
It read: "In light of the ongoing and most recent generosity of His Excellency, Sheikh Marei Mubarak Mahfouz bin Mahfouz I am happy to confirm to you, in confidence, that we are willing and happy to support and contribute to the application for Citizenship.
Gallery: ROYAL UPDATE: Harry's one way ticket to London; Queen's Covid scare (Daily Mail)
Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, Elizabeth II, Prince Harry posing for the camera
"I can further confirm that we are willing to make [an] application to increase His Excellency's honor from Honorary CBE to that of KBE in accordance with Her Majesty's Honors Committee.
"Both of these applications will be made in response to the most recent and anticipated support of the Trust and in connection with his ongoing commitment generally within the United Kingdom. I hope this confirmation is sufficient in allowing us to go forward."
The scandal erupted in the U.K. press on Sunday and by lunchtime former government minister Norman Baker had reported Fawcett to police.
On Monday, anti-monarchy group Republic followed up with their own police report, only this time naming Charles too.
By Monday night the police confirmed they had received a letter and they are yet to announce whether there would be an investigation.
However, Fawcett resigned as chief executive of The Prince's Foundation, Charles' charity empire over the weekend while an investigation by the organization is conducted.
A Clarence House spokesperson said: "The Prince of Wales has no knowledge of the alleged offer of honours or British citizenship on the basis of donation to his charities and fully supports the investigation now underway by The Prince's Foundation."
A Metropolitan Police spokesperson said: "The Met can confirm that we have received a letter about this matter and officers are currently assessing this information."
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
)