She was an iconic figure for sure, the hysteria around "famous people" in general will never reach that kinda hysteria again though. We're far too cynical these days, there's definitely been a change that makes everyone much more realistic these days, I can't describe it but definitely a change
How can you grieve for someone you have never even met?
Presumably the same way that someone's thoughts can be with the family of someone famous who's died, ignoring the other 1350 who've died in the UK the same day.
I don't know enough to comment on the 'gold-digging' aspect. But Kate's family really strike me as fame-hungry parasites; especially her sister.
Plus, I am getting really tired of seeing Kate. The way she got more coverage at the 2012 Olympics than many of the inclusive sports events was bloody infuriating,
Personally I cannot recall the last time I saw her family in the press as such, there was a bit the other day with more stuff about the baby about her mother going to the hairdressers and they used a photo from 2013 , now is that her fault or the press ?
The family have their own business and get no money from us so I am not sure how they are parasites. Her sister has been in the press but again not always for the right reasons she would have sought , and again who should we blame her or the press ?
And quite how did Kate get more attention at the Olympics over two weeks than all the athletes and events ?
Honestly, what utter utter rubbish. India, New York and Nepal were official royal visits and I don't know what you remember, but there was no speeding of any sort involved in any kind of vehicle. And of all the people in the car in Paris, it is somewhat ironic that it should have been Diana driving it.She had driven herself very safely around London for all of seventeen years, with the press always in pursuit and never once did she ever put any lives at risk. In fact, one of her bodyguards while she was still married said she used to say constantly in the car if in London being driven, 'be careful, be slow, don't hit anybody,' when there was photographers hanging off bikes being complete idiots around.
It seems people want to remember what they want to remember, but Diana's life and dutiful service in the royals undertaking thousands of engagements was very very much more than just the last 4 weeks of her life.
And now Kate 'Goldigger' Middleton is replacing her in the Nation's hearts.
These parasites need to be removed from their position of privilege.
I love the anti-monarchists. They're a sign of just how good it is that we've got a monarchy to hold the country together. and isn't it funny how those who make a living out of being anti-monarchy change their tune the richer they get.
For me, one of the more whimsical things that gets thrown out by anti-monarchists at times of national celebration, is their wistful remembrance of that summer of 1977, the year of the Queen’s Silver Jubilee, when the Sex Pistols released their anarchist’s anthem ‘God Save The Queen’. This is still fondly remembered by British pseudo-republicans as a raging protest against royal wealth and privilege, and is often referred to today as if it were still relevant.
These republicans will allow their eyes to mist over as they fondly recall what a great revolutionary Johnny Rotten was. What they tend to overlook is that the spitting, swearing insurrectionist of 1977 now lives the life of a country squire, and trousers a very tidy living out of, amongst other things, making television commercials for butter. Nice work if you can get it.
In 2011, the Queen allowed some previously private letters, from her mother to be released. One of them included a touching note, dated 1942, to her daughter, the then Princess Elizabeth. It began “This is just a little note advising you of one or two things in case your father and I get done in by the Germans. Let’s hope this won’t be needed but we know you will always do the right thing for the people”. At the time these letters were released, John Lydon (he’s since dropped the ‘Rotten’) said of the Queen: “She’s a great monarch, a really ballsy lady”.
Amazing, isn’t it, how making a lot of money can mellow even the most ardent ‘anarchist.’ Anyone for God Save the Queen?
In 1977, republicans were predicting the imminent downfall of the Royal Family, to be brought about by Punk. Thirty eight years on, Sid Vicious is dead. Malcolm McLaren is dead. Johnny Rotten has sold out to the lure of the filthy lucre, and Vivienne Westwood, or, to use her full title, Dame Vivienne Westwood, has inserted herself almost seamlessly into the Establishment she once so despised. And amidst all this, despite the turmoil that has gone on around her in all those years, Queen Elizabeth II is still the monarch of Great Britain and the Commonwealth.
Many things come and go. Monarchy is continuous. That’s why we love it.
I'll give her credit for her work on landmines. And that's about it.
Hmmm.... interesting. But how much did Diana actually DO?
Sure, she was great as a poster girl for the campaign and she certainly drew media attention to the cause, but I was always somewhat dubious about her motives and the real depth of her commitment (or lack of it). There was always the suspicion that it was more a case of "Everybody look at me. Oh, what a great humanitarian I am. Somebody take my picture, quickly."
I'm sorry if that sounds critical, but I can't help feeling her need to find a cause celebre to attach herself to was the greater priority in her mind.
Notwithstanding Diana's (faux?) attachment to the landmines campaign, the Ottawa Treaty was eventually passed, but that was more due to people like Jody Williams (Jody who? I hear you ask), who was jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 along with other members of the group who were the ones who actually did all the hard work.
Interestingly, the United States did not sign the treaty (although Iraq and Afghanistan did), and yet, were the first to complain about the use of IED's by the Taliban in Afghanistan, calling them "evil weapons". The US has also retained the use of cluster weapons, which were also included in the Ottowa Treaty and used them in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. These munitions have caused the deaths of many thousands of innocent victims because of their indiscriminate use.
Clearly, the USA, which claimed to have "Loved" Princess Di were never swayed by her attachment to the cause of banning these weapons.
Jody Williams said herself that the landmine ban would have been near impossible to achieve had it not been for Diana's ability to drum up hundreds of press, who admitted themselves that they would not have gone anywhere near Angola ordinarily. After all, Diana by then didn't HAVE to do anything. That was in the last 6 months of her life. But all the years she spent while married treading back streets of towns here in Britain has been largely forgotten except by the charities and people concerned. A rather good book is Diana a Portrait, an extremely large book, detailing the thousands of visits she paid and the hundreds of people she directly helped and corresponded with, in the 100 or so charities she was patron of. One example is the then Help The Aged, now Age UK, which was a very unglamorous cause, still is, and not something that many celebrities interested themselves in. Diana rocketed their profile, along with so many others. Of course she had faults like we all do, but she did do a lot more than being a mere figurehead which was why so many people laid flowers. It wasn't just because she wore a dress well.
Personally, I found the whole saga of Diana very interesting as I watched her grow up, work as a Royal and have children. She was so very young when she married Charles and we all believed the PR from the Palace that they were madly in love etc. So a lot of us thought we knew her but although sad and upset when she died, I did not go to Hyde Park, or stand outside the Palace wailing!!!!
I think there has been a HUGE campaign to discredit Diana since she died, especially now Charles is working so manically to get Camilla accepted as his Queen. I have been shocked by some of the books written by Penny Junor etc suggesting Diana was mentally ill. I think she coped as best she could with a dreadful situation, your husband in love with another woman, discarding you when you produce the heir and spare, the constant attention of the media as you pretend to be in a Fairy Tale of a Royal Marriage. If she had been as unbalanced as they are NOW trying to indicate, she would have probably killed Charles!!! There is nothing worse in a breakdown of a marriage than total disinterest from your partner. She was supposed to produce the kids and shut up, basically. My goodness, Charles' mistress chose his bride!!! Charles always gets what he wants and he will make Camilla his Queen, regardless of how the general public feel!!
Wow, must have been such hard work going to all those "events".
Being given all those fabulous gowns and jewellery to wear.
Wondering how she was going to cope with all lifes stresses.
No doubt she would be using food banks and begging on the streets.
What an inspiration she was.........................Not!
If you travel around the UK as much as I have you would be amazed at the amount of work Diana, Princess of Wales did during her 17 years in the media storm. Not all fun stuff either, Hospices and Hospitals, OAP Centres etc all over the North of England, also did a lot of work with elderly. Very unfair to say she only got involved in the glamorous side of being a Royal. I think she worked hard to fulfil her duties as POW. A lot more than Kate and Wills are doing now.
Obviously the propaganda is working discrediting her whole life. Soon we will read that Camilla is the mother of Harry and Wills!! Interesting how William seems to be voting with his feet regarding his relationship with Camilla and Charles, who often complains that he does not see enough of Kate, Wills and George!
The point is that .... like Fergie.... she was addicted to travel exotic holidays... sleazy boyfriends......
it was spinning out of control
Its a miracle that the Monarchy has survived Diana and Fergie....
I think we have all forgotten our history The Royals have ALWAYS behaved appallingly. Look at the relationship between Lord Louie Mountbatten and his wife! Open marriage, involved with various partners (in HIS case often men) and yet it was all covered up. We have Andrew and his "odd friends" and his desire to be with very young girls, often commented on with pics here in Germany, but never mentioned in England. The Queen's own marriage has been under a lot of strain over the years with gossip about Phillip and his London apartment!! Seems the Queen could not understand Diana's "problem" regarding Camilla, as she has accepted her husband's behaviour for years!! It has all been whitewashed and censored until very recently. The Royals have always lived by totally different standards than their "people"!!!
The problem was Diana would not keep her mouth closed, she told the world how hypocritical her life was!!
People who actually knew Diana said she was entirely compos mentis and down to earth. Yes, she may have been reckless at times but I think I would have been as well in that deceitful situation.
Personally, I found the whole saga of Diana very interesting as I watched her grow up, work as a Royal and have children. She was so very young when she married Charles and we all believed the PR from the Palace that they were madly in love etc. So a lot of us thought we knew her but although sad and upset when she died, I did not go to Hyde Park, or stand outside the Palace wailing!!!!
I think there has been a HUGE campaign to discredit Diana since she died, especially now Charles is working so manically to get Camilla accepted as his Queen. I have been shocked by some of the books written by Penny Junor etc suggesting Diana was mentally ill. I think she coped as best she could with a dreadful situation, your husband in love with another woman, discarding you when you produce the heir and spare, the constant attention of the media as you pretend to be in a Fairy Tale of a Royal Marriage. If she had been as unbalanced as they are NOW trying to indicate, she would have probably killed Charles!!! There is nothing worse in a breakdown of a marriage than total disinterest from your partner. She was supposed to produce the kids and shut up, basically. My goodness, Charles' mistress chose his bride!!! Charles always gets what he wants and he will make Camilla his Queen, regardless of how the general public feel!!
Excellent post. Charles has always come across as the petulant, spoilt child who MUST have his way, hence giving that atrocious Junor woman unlimited access. Try as he might, there are a significant number of people (me included) who would not cross the road to meet him or his wife.
These soap operas seem to get very personal. To me Diana was just someone I didn't know who died. She may have been the people's princess but not all of the people were bothered about her.
I think we have all forgotten our history The Royals have ALWAYS behaved appallingly. Look at the relationship between Lord Louie Mountbatten and his wife! Open marriage, involved with various partners (in HIS case often men) and yet it was all covered up. We have Andrew and his "odd friends" and his desire to be with very young girls, often commented on with pics here in Germany, but never mentioned in England. The Queen's own marriage has been under a lot of strain over the years with gossip about Phillip and his London apartment!! Seems the Queen could not understand Diana's "problem" regarding Camilla, as she has accepted her husband's behaviour for years!! It has all been whitewashed and censored until very recently. The Royals have always lived by totally different standards than their "people"!!!
The problem was Diana would not keep her mouth closed, she told the world how hypocritical her life was!!
There's plenty of people who for long enough have seen the double standards and attempted cover ups of royals behaving badly.
There really isn't one to better another.
As for hypocritical Di, is that the same one who embraced the royal lifestyle and all its photo opportunities and untold meetings with powerful and influential people hhmmm.
There's plenty of people who for long enough have seen the double standards and attempted cover ups of royals behaving badly.
There really isn't one to better another.
As for hypocritical Di, is that the same one who embraced the royal lifestyle and all its photo opportunities and untold meetings with powerful and influential people hhmmm.
What was she supposed to do? She was trapped in the system for years and she carried out the engagements and more that was expected of her.
Hmmm.... interesting. But how much did Diana actually DO?
Sure, she was great as a poster girl for the campaign and she certainly drew media attention to the cause, but I was always somewhat dubious about her motives and the real depth of her commitment (or lack of it). There was always the suspicion that it was more a case of "Everybody look at me. Oh, what a great humanitarian I am. Somebody take my picture, quickly."
I'm sorry if that sounds critical, but I can't help feeling her need to find a cause celebre to attach herself to was the greater priority in her mind.
Notwithstanding Diana's (faux?) attachment to the landmines campaign, the Ottawa Treaty was eventually passed, but that was more due to people like Jody Williams (Jody who? I hear you ask), who was jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 along with other members of the group who were the ones who actually did all the hard work.
Interestingly, the United States did not sign the treaty (although Iraq and Afghanistan did), and yet, were the first to complain about the use of IED's by the Taliban in Afghanistan, calling them "evil weapons". The US has also retained the use of cluster weapons, which were also included in the Ottowa Treaty and used them in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. These munitions have caused the deaths of many thousands of innocent victims because of their indiscriminate use.
Clearly, the USA, which claimed to have "Loved" Princess Di were never swayed by her attachment to the cause of banning these weapons.
I think we have all forgotten our history The Royals have ALWAYS behaved appallingly. Look at the relationship between Lord Louie Mountbatten and his wife! Open marriage, involved with various partners (in HIS case often men) and yet it was all covered up. We have Andrew and his "odd friends" and his desire to be with very young girls, often commented on with pics here in Germany, but never mentioned in England. The Queen's own marriage has been under a lot of strain over the years with gossip about Phillip and his London apartment!! Seems the Queen could not understand Diana's "problem" regarding Camilla, as she has accepted her husband's behaviour for years!! It has all been whitewashed and censored until very recently. The Royals have always lived by totally different standards than their "people"!!!
The problem was Diana would not keep her mouth closed, she told the world how hypocritical her life was!!
bib - is that really true though, or have we simply just held them up to be better than us, when really there are many of her 'people' who behave in just the same way, and in many other unusual and varied ways, but who aren't vilified for it in the press because they are supposed to act in a certain way, just as we seem to expect people in the public eye to behave in a less human way than the rest of us plebs
Jody Williams said herself that the landmine ban would have been near impossible to achieve had it not been for Diana's ability to drum up hundreds of press, who admitted themselves that they would not have gone anywhere near Angola ordinarily. After all, Diana by then didn't HAVE to do anything. That was in the last 6 months of her life. But all the years she spent while married treading back streets of towns here in Britain has been largely forgotten except by the charities and people concerned. A rather good book is Diana a Portrait, an extremely large book, detailing the thousands of visits she paid and the hundreds of people she directly helped and corresponded with, in the 100 or so charities she was patron of. One example is the then Help The Aged, now Age UK, which was a very unglamorous cause, still is, and not something that many celebrities interested themselves in. Diana rocketed their profile, along with so many others. Of course she had faults like we all do, but she did do a lot more than being a mere figurehead which was why so many people laid flowers. It wasn't just because she wore a dress well.
In the end, I suppose it depends on which version of history you want to believe.
I rather thought that Jody Williams' endorsement of Diana's contribution was simply smart PR. To reduce Diana's contribution with faint praise, bearing in mind that Diana was deemed a goddess in the eyes of the men she needed to have onside for the campaign to be successful, wouldn't have been at all clever, would it..?
Even after her (Diana's) death, to be anything less than 'grateful for what Diana did' would be deemed disrespectful. You don't speak ill of the dead. If Jody Williams said one thing and thought something else, then a) she kept her own counsel and b) she kept her focus on the job and didn't get distracted by the media circus. Sensible and professional.
Of course, nobody really knows the truth. All we know is that the campaign resulted in the Ottawa Treaty and the Nobel Committee saw fit to honour those individuals who made it happen. Would Diana have been included, had she lived..? We'll never know.
What was she supposed to do? She was trapped in the system for years and she carried out the engagements and more that was expected of her.
I so agree with your post. So many people forget that Diana had no legal right to her own children as they belong to the Crown.
If she had walked out, she would have been called a "bolter" presented to the media, by the Palace, as an unbalanced woman with severe mental issues and probably would have had little contact with her sons. Everything about the three-some marriage, the cheating, the friends offering their homes so Camilla and Charles could meet regularly, while they smiled and laughed with Diana at social events!!!!. The fact they made her a joke amongst their social circle etc and other aspects of Charles' behaviour would have been censored!!
Remember Fergie was a "breath of fresh air" and we were told "the Queen adores Fergie" until she did not play the game and then she was given to the dogs!!
Diana received the same treatment after her divorce with comments made in the newspapers repeatedly about her behaviour, her mental state, her spending and her emotional behaviour etc etc....................At the beginning she was presented as the Perfect Bride for Charles who was madly in love with her Yeah Right!
This part, which you yourself quoted and enboldened :
Or do you perhaps have some strange definition of "ironic"?
It's a tough one but I think that you may have misinterpreted her post and that she may have been saying that she thinks Diana is such a careful driver that the car wouldn't have crashed had she been driving instead of Henry Paul therefore it would have been preferable for her to drive rather than her asserting that Diana was actually driving the car at the time.
Comments
What does that have to do with your statement that she was driving?
Presumably the same way that someone's thoughts can be with the family of someone famous who's died, ignoring the other 1350 who've died in the UK the same day.
You say that here, but you don't have the guts to say it to her face even if you had the opportunity.
Personally I cannot recall the last time I saw her family in the press as such, there was a bit the other day with more stuff about the baby about her mother going to the hairdressers and they used a photo from 2013 , now is that her fault or the press ?
The family have their own business and get no money from us so I am not sure how they are parasites. Her sister has been in the press but again not always for the right reasons she would have sought , and again who should we blame her or the press ?
And quite how did Kate get more attention at the Olympics over two weeks than all the athletes and events ?
For goodness sake. Where in my post did I say she had been driving in Paris?
I love the anti-monarchists. They're a sign of just how good it is that we've got a monarchy to hold the country together. and isn't it funny how those who make a living out of being anti-monarchy change their tune the richer they get.
For me, one of the more whimsical things that gets thrown out by anti-monarchists at times of national celebration, is their wistful remembrance of that summer of 1977, the year of the Queen’s Silver Jubilee, when the Sex Pistols released their anarchist’s anthem ‘God Save The Queen’. This is still fondly remembered by British pseudo-republicans as a raging protest against royal wealth and privilege, and is often referred to today as if it were still relevant.
These republicans will allow their eyes to mist over as they fondly recall what a great revolutionary Johnny Rotten was. What they tend to overlook is that the spitting, swearing insurrectionist of 1977 now lives the life of a country squire, and trousers a very tidy living out of, amongst other things, making television commercials for butter. Nice work if you can get it.
In 2011, the Queen allowed some previously private letters, from her mother to be released. One of them included a touching note, dated 1942, to her daughter, the then Princess Elizabeth. It began “This is just a little note advising you of one or two things in case your father and I get done in by the Germans. Let’s hope this won’t be needed but we know you will always do the right thing for the people”. At the time these letters were released, John Lydon (he’s since dropped the ‘Rotten’) said of the Queen: “She’s a great monarch, a really ballsy lady”.
Amazing, isn’t it, how making a lot of money can mellow even the most ardent ‘anarchist.’ Anyone for God Save the Queen?
In 1977, republicans were predicting the imminent downfall of the Royal Family, to be brought about by Punk. Thirty eight years on, Sid Vicious is dead. Malcolm McLaren is dead. Johnny Rotten has sold out to the lure of the filthy lucre, and Vivienne Westwood, or, to use her full title, Dame Vivienne Westwood, has inserted herself almost seamlessly into the Establishment she once so despised. And amidst all this, despite the turmoil that has gone on around her in all those years, Queen Elizabeth II is still the monarch of Great Britain and the Commonwealth.
Many things come and go. Monarchy is continuous. That’s why we love it.
I'll give her credit for her work on landmines. And that's about it.
Hmmm.... interesting. But how much did Diana actually DO?
Sure, she was great as a poster girl for the campaign and she certainly drew media attention to the cause, but I was always somewhat dubious about her motives and the real depth of her commitment (or lack of it). There was always the suspicion that it was more a case of "Everybody look at me. Oh, what a great humanitarian I am. Somebody take my picture, quickly."
I'm sorry if that sounds critical, but I can't help feeling her need to find a cause celebre to attach herself to was the greater priority in her mind.
Notwithstanding Diana's (faux?) attachment to the landmines campaign, the Ottawa Treaty was eventually passed, but that was more due to people like Jody Williams (Jody who? I hear you ask), who was jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 along with other members of the group who were the ones who actually did all the hard work.
Interestingly, the United States did not sign the treaty (although Iraq and Afghanistan did), and yet, were the first to complain about the use of IED's by the Taliban in Afghanistan, calling them "evil weapons". The US has also retained the use of cluster weapons, which were also included in the Ottowa Treaty and used them in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. These munitions have caused the deaths of many thousands of innocent victims because of their indiscriminate use.
Clearly, the USA, which claimed to have "Loved" Princess Di were never swayed by her attachment to the cause of banning these weapons.
I think there has been a HUGE campaign to discredit Diana since she died, especially now Charles is working so manically to get Camilla accepted as his Queen. I have been shocked by some of the books written by Penny Junor etc suggesting Diana was mentally ill. I think she coped as best she could with a dreadful situation, your husband in love with another woman, discarding you when you produce the heir and spare, the constant attention of the media as you pretend to be in a Fairy Tale of a Royal Marriage. If she had been as unbalanced as they are NOW trying to indicate, she would have probably killed Charles!!! There is nothing worse in a breakdown of a marriage than total disinterest from your partner. She was supposed to produce the kids and shut up, basically. My goodness, Charles' mistress chose his bride!!! Charles always gets what he wants and he will make Camilla his Queen, regardless of how the general public feel!!
If you travel around the UK as much as I have you would be amazed at the amount of work Diana, Princess of Wales did during her 17 years in the media storm. Not all fun stuff either, Hospices and Hospitals, OAP Centres etc all over the North of England, also did a lot of work with elderly. Very unfair to say she only got involved in the glamorous side of being a Royal. I think she worked hard to fulfil her duties as POW. A lot more than Kate and Wills are doing now.
Obviously the propaganda is working discrediting her whole life. Soon we will read that Camilla is the mother of Harry and Wills!! Interesting how William seems to be voting with his feet regarding his relationship with Camilla and Charles, who often complains that he does not see enough of Kate, Wills and George!
I think we have all forgotten our history The Royals have ALWAYS behaved appallingly. Look at the relationship between Lord Louie Mountbatten and his wife! Open marriage, involved with various partners (in HIS case often men) and yet it was all covered up. We have Andrew and his "odd friends" and his desire to be with very young girls, often commented on with pics here in Germany, but never mentioned in England. The Queen's own marriage has been under a lot of strain over the years with gossip about Phillip and his London apartment!! Seems the Queen could not understand Diana's "problem" regarding Camilla, as she has accepted her husband's behaviour for years!! It has all been whitewashed and censored until very recently. The Royals have always lived by totally different standards than their "people"!!!
The problem was Diana would not keep her mouth closed, she told the world how hypocritical her life was!!
Excellent post. Charles has always come across as the petulant, spoilt child who MUST have his way, hence giving that atrocious Junor woman unlimited access. Try as he might, there are a significant number of people (me included) who would not cross the road to meet him or his wife.
There's plenty of people who for long enough have seen the double standards and attempted cover ups of royals behaving badly.
There really isn't one to better another.
As for hypocritical Di, is that the same one who embraced the royal lifestyle and all its photo opportunities and untold meetings with powerful and influential people hhmmm.
What was she supposed to do? She was trapped in the system for years and she carried out the engagements and more that was expected of her.
Whatever gets them through the door.
WE dont see a lot of that guy who goaded Di into spilling the beans
these days ... Andrew Morton ...
where is he ? sitting on his millions in Barbados or somewhere ?
In the end, I suppose it depends on which version of history you want to believe.
I rather thought that Jody Williams' endorsement of Diana's contribution was simply smart PR. To reduce Diana's contribution with faint praise, bearing in mind that Diana was deemed a goddess in the eyes of the men she needed to have onside for the campaign to be successful, wouldn't have been at all clever, would it..?
Even after her (Diana's) death, to be anything less than 'grateful for what Diana did' would be deemed disrespectful. You don't speak ill of the dead. If Jody Williams said one thing and thought something else, then a) she kept her own counsel and b) she kept her focus on the job and didn't get distracted by the media circus. Sensible and professional.
Of course, nobody really knows the truth. All we know is that the campaign resulted in the Ottawa Treaty and the Nobel Committee saw fit to honour those individuals who made it happen. Would Diana have been included, had she lived..? We'll never know.
This part, which you yourself quoted and enboldened :
Or do you perhaps have some strange definition of "ironic"?
I so agree with your post. So many people forget that Diana had no legal right to her own children as they belong to the Crown.
If she had walked out, she would have been called a "bolter" presented to the media, by the Palace, as an unbalanced woman with severe mental issues and probably would have had little contact with her sons. Everything about the three-some marriage, the cheating, the friends offering their homes so Camilla and Charles could meet regularly, while they smiled and laughed with Diana at social events!!!!. The fact they made her a joke amongst their social circle etc and other aspects of Charles' behaviour would have been censored!!
Remember Fergie was a "breath of fresh air" and we were told "the Queen adores Fergie" until she did not play the game and then she was given to the dogs!!
Diana received the same treatment after her divorce with comments made in the newspapers repeatedly about her behaviour, her mental state, her spending and her emotional behaviour etc etc....................At the beginning she was presented as the Perfect Bride for Charles who was madly in love with her Yeah Right!
Andrew Morton was in the newspaper just the other day in an article about Monica Lewenski (spelling), the intern who was involved with Clinton!