"Charles At Seventy: Thoughts, Hopes And Dreams" by Robert Jobson (2018)

[Queen Claude]

Charles At Seventy: Thoughts, Hopes And Dreams by Robert Jobson, published by John Blake on November 1 at £20.

Desperate Prince Charles wanted to pull out of his wedding to Diana when he realised how 'incompatible' the pair were, but knew breaking off the engagement would be 'cataclysmic', bombshell book reveals

• Explosive new royal biography marks Prince Charles 70th birthday in November
• Its author and veteran royal reporter Robert Jobson toured the world with him
• Charles described himself as 'permanently between the devil and deep blue sea'
• Revealed he wants to challenge 'pernicious lies' he says were pedalled by Diana

By Richard Kay and Robert Jobson For The Daily Mail
Published: 17:00 EDT, 26 October 2018 | Updated: 20:16 EDT, 26 October 2018

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ately-wanted-pull-wedding-Princess-Diana.html

The life of a monarch-to-be: Seeds for breakfasts, driving back to Balmoral because he left the lights on and telling Camilla not to heat her swimming pool in the winter

• Charles once advised Camilla to stop heating her swimming pool in Wiltshire
• But the pipes ended up freezing and bursting which cost thousands to repair
• The Prince will be oldest person ever to become monarch when he ascends
• For breakfast he always has bowl of seed mixed in with a tiny amount of yoghurt

By Robert Jobson For The Daily Mail
Published: 17:53 EDT, 26 October 2018 | Updated: 20:30 EDT, 26 October 2018

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eakfasts-driving-Balmoral-left-lights-on.html

Prince Charles solved a row with Diana about being late to a state banquet by ordering another martini

• Diana waited impatiently at Kensington Palace 'tutting loudly and tapping feet'
• Prince Charles insisted they left at the same time and asked for another martini
• Argument demonstrated the extent to which the royal relationship had soured

By Robert Jobson For The Daily Mail
Published: 18:08 EDT, 26 October 2018 | Updated: 03:29 EDT, 27 October 2018

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...harles-solved-row-Diana-ordering-Martini.html

 

[Curryong]

I know it's being serialised by the DM but I intend to buy the book. I guess, like all biographies produced by journalists there will be some fudging of facts and stories. There are also some extracts there about Charles's relationship with his adult sons. I'd like to read more, as this aspect of the Prince of Wales's life has been largely left alone by his biographers. Looking forward to reading it.

 

[Osipi]

I'm also going to wait until I can get the book for a song and a dance through my book supplier.

I found that tidbit about being late for a state dinner quite amusing. One thing that is known about Charles is that he's not really a drinker so for him to have ordered a second martini, one would have to know that there was a battle of who rules the roost kind of thing going on.

 

[Queen Claude]

Harry and William's decision to leave Prince Charles out of Diana's 20th anniversary TV documentary 'left him feeling like he never existed'

• Brothers took part in ITV documentary 'Diana, Our Mother: Her Life And Legacy'
• Prince Charles was upset that his sons wrote him completely out of their history
• Insider said the princes should have acknowledged his role in their upbringing

By Robert Jobson For The Daily Mail
Published: 17:57 EDT, 26 October 2018 | Updated: 20:31 EDT, 26 October 2018

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-Dianas-20th-anniversary-TV-documentary.html

 

[Queen Claude]

The Queen and Prince Philip once doubted Charles's suitability for the throne and saw him as a 'loose cannon' with a tendency for tantrums

• Sources claim the Queen and Prince Philip regarded Charles as 'loose cannon'
• Believed his initiatives and causes teetered dangerously on brink of quackery
• Relations so bad at one point that Charles and father communicated in writing

By Robert Jobson For The Daily Mail
Published: 18:01 EDT, 26 October 2018 | Updated: 21:41 EDT, 26 October 2018

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hilip-doubted-Charles-suitability-throne.html

 

[Lumutqueen]

This is all over the DM and I find it no coincidence that it's come out a couple of days after Charles celebratory 70th Birthday Bash where he was praised so highly.

I would buy half these books that the DM plug, except I can read most of it through their articles so why pay?

 

[Lumutqueen]

Another stir up article:

'She'll get what she's given': Queen 'had words' with Harry over 'very difficult' Meghan's choice of wedding tiara:

 

[Curryong]

Yes, another doozy from Jobson. I suppose the aide who gave him the tip-off about this was lying under a sofa listening as the Queen ticked her grandson off. That would be the only way such a reproof would be overheard by anybody else. The Queen has never been known to tear strips off family members in the vicinity of others, or criticise their partners. If she hasn't done it before she's hardly likely to begin at 92, IMO. Ditto for the ridiculous query about Meghan's veil.

 

[Osipi]

OK. I gulped a bit of wine and read the article.

First off, none of what was written comes anywhere near the Harry and Meghan that we've gotten to know since their relationship became public knowledge. Its only purpose is to insinuate that there is friction within the family.

Secondly, "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets", to me, sounds like an off the cuff remark that Harry would make about his future bride when it comes to the wedding trying to please her every way he can but I just can't imagine it being said in a rude way to *anyone*. Its just not characteristic of Harry.

Thirdly, I considered the source. The Sun. We know very well who this paper has been cooperating with with "scoops" on the "real" Meghan from sources only too willing and eager to talk to them. One way to rile these "sources" up is to give them something to feed on.

I do, however, believe that Meghan looking at options for a tiara would gravitate towards emeralds. I imagine also that Meghan being told that it was out of the question would have been accepted with grace. The Queen and Meghan do seem to have a good rapport with each other and haughty is not a word I'd use to describe Meghan nor can I picture Meghan being demanding and insulting to staff or anyone else for that matter.

So, my consensus is that this article is a bunch of stuff that the Sun should be collecting at the bottom of a cage somewhere.

 

[Terri Terri]

Except...we can trace Meghan's jewellery style from pre-Harry days and she has NEVER worn emeralds to my knowledge. She wears mostly yellow gold and diamonds.

 

[Chloep]

So they don't even care this work of fiction stands in direct contrast to what we actually know happened?

"When it came to the tiara on the day I was very fortunate to be able to choose this very gorgeous Art Deco-style bandeau tiara. Harry and I had gone to Buckingham Palace to meet with Her Majesty the Queen to select one of the options that were there, which was an incredibly surreal day, as you can imagine. That was the one that I think, as we tried them on, stood out. I think it was just perfect because it was so clean and simple, and I think also at that point an extension to what Clare and I had been trying to do with the dress, which was have something that could be so incredibly timeless but still feel modern."

The unethical operating of the British tabloid press is disgusting and our media laws need serious overhauling.

 

[csw]

The documentary is uploaded to YouTube at

 

[Queen Claude]

Was this story about the wedding tiara actuallly from Jobson's book or was Jobson's book quoted to give context? Admittedly I am confused because I don't know if the "well-placed royal insider" is speaking to The Sun or if the "well-placed royal insider" is speaking to Jobson and The Sun is reporting it second hand.

 

[Nico]

That's one of the most ridiculous story i have ever read, even for the DM standards.
The "Russian origin" is just laughable.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Russian connection is plausible in the political context of the time of the wedding though. She would have been selecting a tiara no doubt around about the time of the Salisbury poisonings when the British government were calling out the Russians. To then have their newest member wear a piece of jewellery with any sort of connection to Russia could have been interpreted as the BRF in general, or Meghan in particular, publicly showing dissent from the political stance of the British government at the time.

To us that sort of thing may seem silly but that is the sort of thing that the royals do have to take notice of and take into account. Remember the furore about Princess Michael's brooch last year - maybe it was meant as an insult or maybe she was trying to show support for Meghan (I have seen both interpretations) what they wear has to be so carefully chosen so as not to give offence or be seen to be supporting or opposing the government or opposition in any way.

 

[Terri Terri]

Except, we have Meghan's and Harry's own words on audio from their current wedding exhibition at Windsor. Meghan had several options of tiaras to choose from. We can be sure that those options would have been properly vetted by the Queen.

 

[Pranter]

Excellent documentary.


LaRae

 

[jacqui24]

Except...we can trace Meghan's jewellery style from pre-Harry days and she has NEVER worn emeralds to my knowledge. She wears mostly yellow gold and diamonds.

THIS. Diana also has emeralds in her jewelry collection left to her sons, yet we’ve not seen one piece of emerald on Meghan. She’s already worn about 4 pieces from Diana’s collection at different occasions now.

 

[muriel]

THIS. Diana also has emeralds in her jewelry collection left to her sons, yet we’ve not seen one piece of emerald on Meghan. She’s already worn about 4 pieces from Diana’s collection at different occasions now.

But the only time that Meghan has worn a serious pair of earrings (ie, Diana;s emerald and diamond earrings) after the wedding was on the Australasia tour. So it may well be that she loves emeralds, and just has not yet had the chance to wear them.

 

[Curryong]

If Meghan loved emeralds so much they would have been part of her jewellery collection years ago, long before Harry, with pieces she bought herself. There was no sign of any emerald jewellery in photos of her at red carpet events etc pre 2016.

 

[Betsypaige]

It’s obvious that his sons love him very much (at least based on an article I read previewing the BBC special), but I can understand why Charles was hurt that William and Harry excluded him completely from that Diana special that aired a couple of years ago. I choose to think that kids can often be thoughtless, not thinking about their parents’ feelings. I’m also hoping that they, as they grow older, will eventually understand that their father did the best he could while raising them without their mother. Of course it reminds me that Charles himself struggled with his mother’s absence when he was a boy. I also hope that Charles’ relationship with his parents is solid now, and that father and son are on better terms. I’ll probably buy the book at some point – it’s nice to have what appears to be a balanced account of Charles’s life rather than the tawdry, ugly books that have been released in the last couple of years.

 

[Pranter]

Well we don't know that Charles was excluded or hurt either one. Again, tabloids.

There would be no reason for Charles to be part of a special the boys did on the anniversary of their mother's death. They were divorced a year, after years of unhappiness, when she died. Due to their public battles and how much it tarnished Charles it's not likely he would want to get involved in that.


LaRae

 

[jacqui24]

What I don't understand about people that sees the Princes not mentioning their father when honoring their mother as a diss to him is this: do you expect them to mention and honor their mother when they are honoring their father?

No? Ok, then.

The fact of the matter is that Charles and Diana have long divorced. The boys can honor both parents. It's unlikely it'll ever be at the same time due to the amount of history that went down long before they came of age.

 

[jacqui24]

But the only time that Meghan has worn a serious pair of earrings (ie, Diana;s emerald and diamond earrings) after the wedding was on the Australasia tour. So it may well be that she loves emeralds, and just has not yet had the chance to wear them.

She's worn 2 bracelets, one pair of earrings, and one ring from her already. I would expect her to jump on the emeralds if they are THAT important to her. She could've easily switched out any of the significant pieces of diamond earring she's worn for the emeralds. She hasn't. Now watch her wear it soon.

 

[Heavs]

It's not totally unbelievable that some sort of thing occurred where Meghan liked a Tiara that was then or later deemed unsuitable and words were said. Things can get heated when planning a wedding, especially x a billion people watching. As described however, not likely in the slightest.

However much of a Diva/upstart/goldigger etc you might think someone to be, throwing a hissy fit about not getting the tiara you want before you even join the family, not plausible. If her heart had been set on something like that there are others more similar than the one she wore....

The tiara Meghan ultimately had perfectly suited her dress and other tastes that we've seen in public and at the wedding itself. There was nothing that would have been enhanced by a Russian style emerald tiara as there was at Eugenie's.

If something was considered unsuitable for providence, political, family, name reasons, would it even have been one of the ones they viewed at all?

 

[Stargazer]

The whole does not make sense to me. Plus even if a bit of truth in it sounds blown out of proportion with drama added. In addition this whole thing of comparing Kate to Meghan and how they treat the staff where Kate of course comes out as being perfect Very typical

 

[TLLK]

If Meghan loved emeralds so much they would have been part of her jewellery collection years ago, long before Harry, with pieces she bought herself. There was no sign of any emerald jewellery in photos of her at red carpet events etc pre 2016.

The only connection that I could possibly see to emeralds is that the precious stone associated for with May is the emerald. However that is typically associated with birthstones AFAIK.



If there is any truth to the story, the only plausible explanation is that the Greville Emerald tiara was already promised to Eugenie for her wedding.

Meghan looked lovely in the Art Deco bandeau and it was a beautiful part of her wedding attire.

 

[Pranter]

At the many many pics we saw of Meghan in the threads here pre-wedding I don't remember her wearing much jewelry at all (usually her rings) ...no emeralds. No colored stones. I think it was made known she is a diamond and yellow gold girl.

Such un-necessary drama.



LaRae

 

[muriel]

She's worn 2 bracelets, one pair of earrings, and one ring from her already. I would expect her to jump on the emeralds if they are THAT important to her. She could've easily switched out any of the significant pieces of diamond earring she's worn for the emeralds. She hasn't. Now watch her wear it soon.

But there has only been one evening gala event since the wedding that Meghan has worn a long pair of earrings, when she wore the borrowed diamond earrings. She could hardly have worn the dangling emerald and diamond earrings at a day time event.

Just so that we are clear, I am not arguing that emeralds are important to her, just that there does not appear to be any evidence that she dislikes them!

 

[Curryong]

There's no evidence that Meghan likes emeralds in a tiara so much that she would spit the dummy over it either, or that Harry would cause a scene on her behalf.

Except of course, apart from a ridiculous story from a journalist who has stated that an aide stood by listening while the Queen tore strips off her grandson in front of him/her (unnamed of course) and made assertions about Harry's fiancee's character and manners. The aide then, according to Jobson, repeated the whole story to him so he could put it in his biography!