MrsTrellisfromNorthWales Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Charles 'Can't Bear' BBC's Nicholas Witchell By Laura Elston, PA Deputy Court Correspondent The Prince of Wales was said to have regretted his comments about the BBC’s royal correspondent who he branded as “awful”. Charles was heard to mutter under his breath “bloody awful people” at a gathered press pack during an official Clarence House photocall at the Swiss ski resort of Klosters. The heir to the throne’s mumbles, in which he revealed a particular dislike for BBC correspondent Nicholas Witchell, were picked up on microphones buried in the snow. About Witchell, he remarked: “I can’t bear that man anyway. He’s so awful, he really is.” Paddy Harverson, Clarence House’s communication secretary, said the Prince regretted taking his “general frustration” out on Mr Witchell. Mr Harverson said: “Nicholas was in the firing line when the Prince was expressing his general frustration at the paparazzi and it boiled over at the first person to ask a question. “It wasn’t personal. He does regret saying it. He really didn’t mean to take it out on Nicholas.” Asked whether the Prince was going to apologise, he added: “We’re not going to go into that.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul H Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Good for Prince Charles. It was about time a Royal broke with protocol and had an opinion heard in public. After all, the press seem to report public opinion on him so what could be wrong with putting the boot on the other foot and giving the press a swift kick in the backside? A person can only put up with so much before they break, this is what the press wanted and now they have got it. Only hope that Charles has thicker skin than they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Addie Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Video link here Doesn't matter anyway. Charles has lost it and so it seems has William - the throne i.e. - because here (as the soon to be eldest son) is the next but one king - Tom Parker Bowles with his mother the next queen, Camilla From drugs item May '99: The Prince of Wales was reported to have telephoned his godson Tom Parker Bowles and given him a severe scolding over newspaper claims that he had taken cocaine. Great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasha Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 It's not the sniffing it's the getting caught. The Royals should take drugs just like everyone else anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave the Cardboard Box Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 It's just because Nicholas is a Ginger Everyone hates him (Except Sue Lawley) *He saved her life by sitting on a Lesbian.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Good news. It sounds like he's turning out like his dad who is always good value. Next thing he'll be asking Mugabe if he still chucks spears. - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul H Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 It's not the sniffing it's the getting caught.The Royals should take drugs just like everyone else anyway. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Having seen the Osbornes on telly and then seen the antics of the Royal Family I can only conclude that they are all the same. Fact is that if we were getting the media attention these people are getting, most of us would be caught doing something that could make newspaper headlines!!! Oh, and I think the Duke of Edinburgh is cool, must be on drugs or something but has yet to be caught. Great value entertainment, I would love to have him as an after dinner speaker. If only his wife would let him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Addie Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 April Fool surely? Radio 4 Today soundfile edited untidy mess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Queen Elizabeth II According to rumours going round British newsrooms, the Queen has got a serious illness and may not be long for this world - hence the rushed Charles-Camilla marriage to prepare him for the throne. But we hope that, like her gin-pickled Mum, Liz continues to defy the Grim Reaper for another few decades. PopBitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul H Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Queen Elizabeth II According to rumours going round British newsrooms, the Queen has got a serious illness and may not be long for this world - hence the rushed Charles-Camilla marriage to prepare him for the throne. But we hope that, like her gin-pickled Mum, Liz continues to defy the Grim Reaper for another few decades. PopBitch <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Maybe she's just so hacked off with it all she's fed up and looking to retire. Thinking to herself "let that lazy little sod find out what it's like to do some hard work and see where he finds the time for showing himself up with old buggers like Camillla." Of course after Charles's little gem about Nicholas Witchell, she's probebly terrified that he's turning into his father. Every man's son dreads the day this happens too, but all too often it's futile to try and avoid it. It's nature at it's worst. I don't think anything is going to prepare Charles for the throne if he isn't already prepared by now. As for Camilla??? I'm sure she's just lovely, but as Queen of England? Wouldn't really wish to have her as a Great Aunt. You know the one you only have to see once a year or so. But as Queen of England you would have to see her almost everyday on your telly and in the newspapers. Still, love is blind. Can't deny them happiness if this is what they want. But I think QEII still has a fair wind in her sails, if you know what I mean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 All ceremonies and rituals are daft - and therefore we don't need ceremonial and ritual Heads of States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hollandaise Posted April 2, 2005 Share Posted April 2, 2005 All ceremonies and rituals are daft - and therefore we don't need ceremonial and ritual Heads of States. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What an incredibly stupid remark. What is there to say after such a crass statement, except perhaps to ask why people bother with funerals? Just shove your dead friends and relatives into the nearest binbag or toss 'em off a cliff. Anything more complex or time-consuming is just plain daft - according to Simple Simon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul H Posted April 3, 2005 Share Posted April 3, 2005 All ceremonies and rituals are daft - and therefore we don't need ceremonial and ritual Heads of States. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What an incredibly stupid remark. What is there to say after such a crass statement, except perhaps to ask why people bother with funerals? Just shove your dead friends and relatives into the nearest binbag or toss 'em off a cliff. Anything more complex or time-consuming is just plain daft - according to Simple Simon. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> When it comes to my funeral I would not be offended if you shove me in a bin bag etc. Frankly, I'll be dead. And I won't care. Ritual and Ceremony is not for everyone and I don't think anyone should feel 'obliged' to participate in any ceremony if they don't want to. The effort that goes into such occasions, not to mention the expense, could be used in much more imaginative ways and to the benefit of many people. Now that's complex and time consuming, and not daft, but practicle. What could be wrong with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ephemeris Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Funerals are for the living, not the dead. They give you something to do after a loved one has died. Better than sitting around in grief. Especially if it's a spouse or a child who's died. It's selfish to tell people how to behave after you've died. That's up to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Queen Elizabeth II According to rumours going round British newsrooms, the Queen has got a serious illness and may not be long for this world - hence the rushed Charles-Camilla marriage to prepare him for the throne. But we hope that, like her gin-pickled Mum, Liz continues to defy the Grim Reaper for another few decades. Total crapulence. I suspect that Liz has told Chas that he is never going to be the the most over-subscribed pensioner on the planet so he might as well stop Camilla nagging him over his NI subscriptions by giving her legal rights to continue exploiting the peasants in Kernow. - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.