The Royal Family and the Media


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.

BeatrixFan

Majesty , Royal Blogger, TRF Author
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
6,861
City
London
Country
United Kingdom
WALLIS WAS MADE QUEEN



From The Sun, 13/07/06

The Sun can exclusively reveal that the late Duchess of Windsor was made Queen in 1936 in a secret ceremony at Kensington Castle. Surrounded by FREEMASONS and NAZI friends, the Duchess was crowned by King Edward VIII or "Dirty David" as he was known to his close family. The Duchess became Queen Wallis on the 30th February 1936 and demanded that she be called "Her Royal Majesterialness". Queen Wallis had 76 Ladies in Waiting which cost the tax payer approximately £900,000 each, each year. One of these Ladies in Waiting was the mother of Lord LUCAN who as Sun readers will already know, was the killer of Diana, Princess of Wales. For some time there have been claims that Wallis and Edward VIII had an illegitimate child. This is true, they had illegitmate twins, one of whom was Elvis Presley and the other was Camilla Shand, born CAMILLA Parker-Bowles, who went on to marry The Prince of Charles last year.

QUEEN WALLIS did carry out various ceremonial events including opening the Parliament of Umbongo Land (which was a British colony until Margaret Thatcher lost it for us) and shooting J.R. Later in life, Wallis collected corgis and became lovers with Adolf Hitler who, as Sun readers will already know, was the killer of Diana, Princess of Wales. Wallis, who also used the title Duchess of Treacle Bumpstead, later resided in France where she paid money to the CHIRAC government to bribe the European Union, which as Sun readers will already know, is the organisation responsible for the killing of Diana, Princess of Wales. She later printed passports for KOSOVANS and Bosnians who leech off of society and don't read The Sun. Royal watchers are aware that Wallis sold her soul to the Devil who, as Sun readers will already know, currently manifests himself as Princess MICHAEL of KENT.

MORE on the shocking Royal revelation tomorrow when Paul Burrell will give his account;

Wallis confided in me. She said, "Paul - you are my rock. She told me her deepest darkest secrets. And that's why I'm selling them to The Sun"

James Whittaker will give his insider information;

I have inside information because I do and because I know people and they tell me the inside information and then I tell people and I do. So there.

And FERGIE, Duchess of York and Manager of Manchester United Football Club will tell us just why Wayne Rooney and Queen Wallis hired MI5 to assassinate John F Kennedy.
 
Last edited:
I should explain. I was very bored, found that pic at the GREMB (originally from Royalty Magazine) and decided to have a dig at The Sun and to illustrate the point that out of all the British media, The Sun is the least reliable. No offence meant to anyone - just the ramblings of a very bored Englishman.
 
Last edited:
I thought it was hysterical, BeatrixFan. Thanks for a laugh!
 
Nonono - it was Cookie who collected corgis. Queen Wally collected pugs. Everybody knows that. Really, doesn't that bloody paper have any standards?
 
Last edited:
Have you guys ever been in the line and the grocery store and happen to glance and the black and white newspaper called "The News"? You know its the same paper with any number of aliens on the cover? The very same ones that have them living here on earth among us! I vividly remember seeing a very, very, very old Adam and Eve on surfboards on one of their front pages with the caption: "Adam and Eve Spotted in Hawaii on Vacation". Should we add Queen Wallis to this outrageous list, too?!:D
 
Maybe Beatrixfan is a writer for National Enquirer in his spare time.:D
 
When I first saw this headline I thought - here's fun - someone is going to be shot down in flames very quickly but then I read the article and couldn't stop laughing.


Very well done Beatrix.
 
I especially liked the slight imitation of the style of one Joanne Leyland... LOL! Thank you Beatrixfan!
 
he..he. i particularly like the way the author inserted outrageous people and events in the article.......it made my day...
 
That was hilarous :D Thank you for posting.
 
You should consider a writing career, BeatrixFan! That was hilarious! :D
 
wonder how royal life would of turned out if she had been made Queen of England , could wallis have children???
 
sm1939,
I was wondering the same thing. How different British history would be! I did read something some years back about the Duchess not being able to have children. That's truly sad if they did indeed want them.:(
 
The book was Philip and Elizabeth. It pretty much stated that because the Duke and Duchess of Windsor couldn't have children, Elizabeth would've still been queen. So that would've made her heir-presumptive, right?
 
Glad you all liked the story. The frightening thing is that several people PMed me asking if it was a real story from The Sun!!
 
BeatrixFan said:
Glad you all liked the story. The frightening thing is that several people PMed me asking if it was a real story from The Sun!!

Liked it? It was hillarious! I loved it! :D :D :D
You should have really seen me, my eyebrows were in danger to dissappear under my hair, so high they were.
I did get it was a made up one (well, not a big deal, given what you have written;) :D ) but for a moment I also wondered whether Sun had actually written that! :D I mean it would be too far-fetched even for Sun! :D :p
Btw, do consider a writer's job, you've got a talent!!!!:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
lol - thankyou very much Avalon. I have to admit, the writing came as an excuse to post the picture. I remember hearing Joan Rivers talking about the National Enquirer and she said about Alien landings etc. She said, "I am in the National Enquirer, I'm having an affair with Franklin D Roosevelt". So The Sun and The Enquirer don't seem that different!
 
BeatrixFan,
The National Enquirer is definitely trash! Just goes to show how far and free "freedom of the press" goes. And it actually sells!

Anyway back to Wallis...I think we all loved the hilarity of it. I always enjoy your post.:D ;)
 
kerry said:
The book was Philip and Elizabeth. It pretty much stated that because the Duke and Duchess of Windsor couldn't have children, Elizabeth would've still been queen. So that would've made her heir-presumptive, right?

Actually...no, which was good. When Edward VIII abdicated, her renounced not only his rights to the throne, but also the rights of any descendants he may have had. So, even if he had children with Wallis, they would have no place in line to the throne...whether they were married or not as the other side is a child must be born in wedlock to stand in line. Case in point are some of the Lascelles (through Princess Mary) grandchildren and nephew of the present Earl who wore not born in wedlock and are not in line to the throne.
 
sm1939 said:
wonder how royal life would of turned out if she had been made Queen of England , could wallis have children???

Wallis could not have children due to OB-GYN problems and cancer of the uterus. If she had become Queen Consort, Elizabeth would have succeeded Edward VIII as Sovereign after his death.
 
branchg said:
Wallis could not have children due to OB-GYN problems and cancer of the uterus. If she had become Queen Consort, Elizabeth would have succeeded Edward VIII as Sovereign after his death.

Correct. Elizabeth would still be queen today. But on the other hand, if he was't forced to abidicate and "marry the woman he loved", like some, she would have been queen.
 
I think Wallis would have been a good Queen. Certainly most people, include Winston Churchill, wanted her to be.
 
I just saw the 'article' brilliant is all I can say! :D :D
 
Lady Marmalade said:
Actually...no, which was good. When Edward VIII abdicated, her renounced not only his rights to the throne, but also the rights of any descendants he may have had. So, even if he had children with Wallis, they would have no place in line to the throne...whether they were married or not as the other side is a child must be born in wedlock to stand in line. Case in point are some of the Lascelles (through Princess Mary) grandchildren and nephew of the present Earl who wore not born in wedlock and are not in line to the throne.

I think maybe you misunderstood what I was asking or I just didn't word it right.:eek: If Wallis was queen with her OB problems and unable to reproduce, wouldn't Elizabeth have been considered the heir-presumptive as a child? Or am I off the mark?:confused:
 
Well, as third in line after her father, the answer is yes but she wouldn't have been hailed as a future Queen until Wallis had passed child bearing age.
 
I think maybe you misunderstood what I was asking or I just didn't word it right.:eek: If Wallis was queen with her OB problems and unable to reproduce, wouldn't Elizabeth have been considered the heir-presumptive as a child? Or am I off the mark?:confused:

Her father would have been heir presuptive until his death. I think anyone other than the eldest surviving son of the monarch is considered to be the heir presumptive even if the queen isn't able to bear children for one reason or other.

If Wallis had predeceased Edward and he'd remarried a younger woman, he could have had a child who would have become heir. Even if not, back then it wasn't the done thing to speculate about issues dealing with sex so even if it was known that that the queen or even the king was unable to have children, they'd have kept up the polite fiction of a sibling, niece, or nephew being the heir presumptive. I think that even if George VI had lived to his 70s or 80s and Queen Elizabeth had clearly been past child-bearing age during her husband's lifetime, Princess Elizabeth would have been heir presumptive, not heir apparent, until she became Queen.
 
Thanks Elspeth! I think I can follow that.:eek: :)
 
BeatrixFan said:
I think Wallis would have been a good Queen. Certainly most people, include Winston Churchill, wanted her to be.

That's quite a stretch. It was very clear when the news became public that the vast majority of the British people were adamantly opposed to a twice-divorced woman becoming Queen.

Whether she might have been accepted as a royal duchess or princess consort to the King is an open question. But the Government refused to consider it since the law was clear that the wife of the King is automatically Queen Consort and nothing else without Parliament's assent.
 
Well, from what I've read, most British people didn't actually care much about Wallis, they just wanted to keep Edward VIII and if that meant accepting Wallis then so be it. Indeed, if you look at news reports, there are photographs of huge marches with people protesting to "Keep our King" etc. I think it was the Government that had a problem, and not the people. Winston Churchill is said to have told Wallis he'd ensure she was Queen but I've never seen any confirmation that he did although he was a huge supporter of Edward and so it wouldn't suprise me. But we'll never know. I think it's a shame she never got her chance to shine but we had the Queen Mother as Queen and that was wonderful so maybe it's best history did pan out as it did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom