Remember I am only reviewing this… I didn’t write it! I left out the worst bits! It is interesting and confronting and it will lead to robust discussion I’m sure! When I implied Diana would be concerned about William and Harry it had nothing to do with anyone being gay or straight… it was concerning the alleged sexual assault which is an act of violence. ❤
Don't apologise. I loved your review. Unfortunately, the Charles versus Diana story is emotionally charged, evidenced by how people have added the word "secretly" taped when "secret was never mentioned. You seem to have landed in a nest of Charles supporters or Lady Colin followers. There will always be a lot of people waiting to tear Diana down to make their King look bigger. I wish they would all go hug a landmine to get over it. JMO
PS I love your videos. I used to watch Dan Wooton and Megyn Kelly but I've gone off them. Their videos now appear to be a Harry-bashing show. Your videos are more even.
Interesting talk, as always, and as you said, plenty of material for discussion. If Diana was worried about her sons being assaulted she would have moved heaven and earth to keep them out of posh English boarding schools, which are notorious for that kind of thing. Whatever her motive for taking recordings, I doubt it had anything to do with protecting her children.
Isn’t it ironic that Harry is spending so much money and energy fighting against the very thing his mother was guilty of. Secretly recording conversations. 🤭
Diana definitely planted stories. It's good to have a source along with Lady C telling us that Diana and Richard Kay were in contact. Lady C said Diana often called Richard Kay to leak/plant stories and seeing she borrowed his equipment, backs up the idea they were on easy speaking terms.
@@jasminetyana2426 I have found when regular people (not reporters) record conversations it is more than 90% done secretly. Not a bias. Just being realistic. Sounds like you have your biases.
If the story of Diana recording someone (unbeknownst to him) while he is telling her his personal secrets in confidence while recovering from mental stress in a hospital, is true then Diana is a despicable character, even if she'd only done it once. Yet, she repeated it.
@@thevintageread still highly unethical since a person in such an unstable state of mind is extremely vulnerable and not in the right condition to make important decisions.
It's OK to record someone with their permission. George Smith may have even welcomed it or asked to be recorded. Try not to jump to biased conclusions.
Intriguing! I want to support the new King (and it may be that Charles has repented of any wrongdoing) but, we badly need a more transparent and egalitarian working system across the whole Palace.
I’m sorry for King Charles a man unhappy in his early life now blackmailed and slandered for seeking comfort wherever. He s entitled to a private life like any of us
I feel once again that people seem to have missed something. Why did diana twice record this poor man secretly. I don't think it was for his benefit but for Diana's. More ammunition against Charles. The second attempt to record him was with the help of a tabloid. I'm not saying Charles is perfect but its unbelievable how everything is his fault and those around him are blameless. I think you should deep dive Diana's motives.
Remember they recorded Diana while she was on the phone ... The War of the Waleses was a dirty one. I remember it, as am of the same age as H. and Prince William.
@@thevintageread I certainly hope George Smith gave her his permission! To secretly tape someone talking about such a personal, private and deeply traumatic event would be unconscionable. I've always loved Diana and don't want to believe she could do something like that.
Using someone, who wasn't mentally well, to discredit your ex-husband is really despicable. It sounds like they all played this game. Shakespeare truly understood royalty.
The Burrell story is interesting. I always thought it was a nice piece of largesse by the late Queen not to pursue in court a long serving employee. Didn't occur to me that he might have kept a little something up his sleeve! I think someone should write a book on Bower. Says he's a monarchist but talks like a closet republican. Takes his animosity toward the King to the point of silliness at times.
Agree with you especially on the last point. Someone should write about him and how he wants to cash in now by changing the title of the book when Charles is king for only 3 minutes😂😂😂
I agree with you also. I saw him on one of the coverages for the coronation and cashes and trades in on the close association with Diana where she 'gifted him' all those items apparently. He was on Australia I'm a Celebrity, along with a 'psychic' that connected with Princess Diana in spirit (gag as i write). Teared up and talked about their 'special relationship'.
Regardless of what any author, footman, inside source says, their is still a lot that goes on within that family that we will never know. I am happy for the BRF to get on with the job they to do, and I am so pleased it is them and not me having to do it. As Dame Maggie Smith says in a Downton Abbey episode, everyone goes down the aisle with only half the story told. Our Royal Family are not perfect and I don't expect them to be. I am just happy and respectful of the awesome job that they do.
I don’t feel like Charles needs to be trashed any more than he already has been. I also think if anyone looks guilty here it’s Paul Burrell. I’m not quite sure what the implication about Charles is here. Diana doesn’t look too good either
@@kirri1312 i personally did not sense or catch any implication about KC either directly or indirectly. The lady is reviewing a book and the characters within. Telling a story basically.
@@kirri1312 I apologize I am dealing with a bit of a pile on behind the scenes and it affects me sometimes. A lot of people really over react! Thanks for commenting x
You wouldn't want to be a royal for anything. Their lives are under the microscope and what is viewed there has many interpretations. We are fascinated because their existence is so different from ours. People like Paul Burrell and Tom Bower have made a living out of giving their versions of the stories. They take every financial opportunity to give their own opinions.
Exactly. They didn't ask to be born into the Royal family. I wish that William would take his lovely family and go and live a happy life away from all the negativity and hatred.
If I suddenly became famous and someone decided to write a book about me they would be able to dig up some true and not so true gossip about me and throw in the few manipulators that I have crossed paths with and I would become the person the author wanted me to become in their book. Diana liked to manipulate and I think the Queen headed her of at the pass a few times.
Hello Shauna, thank you for delving into the books we’d like to read if we had more time. I am enjoying your nuanced reviews and your insights where you question the logic, the story line, the writers, or the cast of characters. Your commentary is lively, humorous, and sympathetic when warranted. Thank you for taking the time to create your literary videos. They are always enjoyable, fun, and thought provoking.
I love the way you put things forth - balanced with just the hint of mischief and intrigue to make things interesting. You look lovely and you are charming. Bless you.
@@thevintageread exactly, Diana should have known better than to tape someone when they are vulnerable. Diana behaviour in some aspects is very questionable.
@Xhogun I agree. One thing I am happy for is that the King has been crowned, and William has inherited the best of his mother and father, Diana was devious and manipulative but she did do some good later in her life before she died. William has that good part, both he and the king have a strong loving bond with each other, that's really obvious. I probably won't be around to see William crowned but he will make a good king and his family will be a generation of wonderful royals to support him
They say, be careful who you let onto your ship, because some people will sink the whole ship just because they can’t be the Captain. Charles has more than staff & authors to contend with, his own son’s on the loose with more cannons to fire it seems. Charles will need Camilla to sort a few more maybe.
I forgot who made a video that was here on UA-cam I watched I think Lady C. It described how William was called to the principal's office of his school when his mother's interview came out. He asked to see it. He was furious with his mother and said that it was his family she spoke about. Since then my obsession with Diana changed. She also wanted bring down the Royals and had to be reminded by her child that it is his family, his father and this weekend he showed the world whatever the "know it alls say" he loves his fater
I don't believe a word Lady Colin says. I don't follow people who start petitions to remove others' titles when they them self kept their title after only 14 months of marriage. Interesting how she calls herself Lady C and not Lady Colin.
Thank you for reading the book so we don't have to! ❤ It sounds like Princess Diana was trying to get some sort of revenge against Prince Charles. If she was really concerned about the young princes safety, I think she would have taken swift/legal action to keep the boys away from Highgrove. Tom Bower, likes controversy and will criticize King Charles and Meghan Markle in the same sentence. Tom Bower's interviews with Dan Wooten are always negative, like he's trying to create drama and chaos.
I agree. When listening to TB on different channels I’ve noticed that tinge of negativity or a litter bit of an antagonist thought or statement hardly noticed. Then as it sinks in,you just realize what you’ve heard. For me his saying how much damage Harry and his wife are causing the Royals, I think, no . The lies, inconsistencies and stories from his book ,make them look damaged.
On what grounds would Diana take legal action? It would be baseless, without presenting the evidence from George Smith. Any mother would want to keep her boys away from a suspected sexual predator. Not revenge. Love for her boys. We will probably never know.
@@marybarry6408and the invading of privacy of others. He could have made all his points without that, may be even better. Because most of his examples are very childish.
I watched the lost tapes on Diana. They were videos done of her to help her learn public speaking techniques as she was really bad at the beginning. She had leaked stuff to Andrew Morton for the book. She talked about her childhood and how they were left by the mother, her insecurities, etc. I think it shows what Diana was really like. Extremely immature, demanding. I believe she enjoyed the attention she was getting and she was jealous of Camilla because she didn’t have the love from Charles. It wasn’t the Disney version of marrying a prince and more like the Grimms Brothers fairytales. I honestly think Harry is more like her and William just has her looks and the compassion.
Charles was 12yrs older than Diana. I thought from the very beginning that it was an arranged marriage. Charles courted Dianas sister first. Charles always loved Camilla, but he dragged his heels, so Camilla married Bower. Marriages in haste rarely work. I'm glad Charles and Camilla got back together and married, they both put up with a lot of bad press, and got through it. x
Inevitably, the bigger a person’s life is, the messier it becomes. When many people are closely interacting with a person, that person will get sucked into their drama. KC has a big life, meaning, there are always dozens of people he is closely interacting with daily. The drama of his staff, whether it’s their personal relationships, jealousy, or fear, unfortunately, Charles will get pulled into some of the drama. I never thought Harry’s motivation for talking about his family was a need to tell the truth, expose hidden family secrets or clearing his reputation. He’s frankly too dumb to know what is true. His motivation is to make a lot of money. Greed. His advisors probably sat around a table with him when he left the UK, and after getting to know him, realized he has no talent, skills, is lazy and emotionally retarded. The irony is that if he was smart, he would have figured out a way to stay in good graces with the Queen and inherit a small fortune. Instead, he was taken out of her will. I understand why KC appears to be so forgiving and soft on Harry. Harry is a child-man who doesn’t have the sense to make good decisions. I have sympathy for the entire royal family. They have difficult, BIG lives.
Have you read Charles: The Heart Of A King, by Catherine Mayer? It's very thorough, but less obsessive than Rebel Prince. Reminds me of Tina Brown's more recent Palace Papers in quality and tone, but focussed on Charles. It's hard to get a really objective picture of the Royals, so I find it's helpful to read a number of books/ opinions.
Michael Fawcett, aid to Charles, caught up in an alleged sex scandal involving an underling. Louis Mountbatten, uncle to Charles, caught up in an alleged sex scandal related to a boy's orphanage in Ireland. Yes. I wish I wasn't aware of these things.
I’m going to skip this review if you don’t mind because I think the King has suffered enough with Spare. I will hold onto the little good faith he’s got in my heart atm. 😬 Happy weekend to you ❤
It's interesting, another UA-cam creator said that after reading Spare, her thought of King Charles was that Charles was quite a lovely man. Harry? Not so much.
@@sidneybales9062 I do too. My trick was, just don't include Harry's interpretation of the situation. His opinions and comments put aside = you'll see his TRUE FEELINGS for his father. Gyles Brandreth was the one who "hinted" on This Morning, that that was what he did. And I followed.
Michael fawcett power & treatment of staff below him reminds me of another royal staff member that got too big for his britches was the Queen Mums head of the back stair William Tallon who was the queen mums top go to jack of all trades senior staff . Theres a video on Wiliam Tallon which shows the good bad & ugly of his lifes duty & how he treated people
If Harry referred to Tom Bower’s book The Rebel King he would risk simultaneously bringing attention to Revenge. Also Harry might not know the stories in The Rebel King
Loved your review and analysis, loved all the comments and differing takes on the various elements in this story. I’ve learned a lot and thoroughly enjoyed it all! I do appreciate how extremely difficult it can be dealing with some of the backlash, which is utterly foolish and childish on their part. You are doing a brilliant job! Much love and respect from 🇨🇦
Thank you for sharing your understanding of this story. I have just finished reading Tom Bowers book and was totally horrified by the contents. It opens up so many new - and troubling perspectives.
It would appear that George Smith was "thrown under the bus" as it were. Karma finally caught up with Michael Fawcett. Makes one think "how many others???" did this man destroy. Also it makes one realise that Prince Charles is as guilty as Prince Andrew in regards to very poor judgement!!! It leaves an appalling taste and is eceptionally tawdry. I loathe bullies and the harm they cause their victims. That they are supported at all is appalling but in this case by someone who holds such station!! Lack of strength to deal with honour and integrity, in the face of dishonour is unacceptable. But what is the saying "Absolute power corrupts absolutely". Very, very sad and I am disillusioned. Feet of clay. Beware of idols. Don't go putting people on pedestals. Maybe I can understand Tom Bowers vitriol.
Explosive show! As an American I , as much as I appreciate the RF, never knew of all this intrigue! Like you though I’m not sure I want to know! 🫣 Love your channel!
I feel that it’s quite unfair to slag KC off for being human,caring what happens to planet earth,wanting ,in his acceptance of the role he inherited,to be modern and inclusive.Apparently this makes him worthy of being mocked.Does it really?
Amazing….amazing presentation. A blockbuster movie if there were such things anymore. I think it’s explosive to say the least. Your take is fair and well done. Being American, nothing shocks me anymore.
Be careful on people who get OVERHYPED by the media. The Harry Meghan debacle make them look like angels, but what do the facts say? I myself is William fan but I don't look forward to his reign YET - it's super disrespectful to talk about it too. And I don't know, I like Charles being an Underdog, look how he successfully SHUT UP every critics. And William being OVERHYPED makes me worried. What has been his accomplishment? His father when 40 years old had already done many things - what has he done? The facts aren't there yet, he just started. See what OVERHYPING is doing to him?
Unfortunately Tom Bower has a very biased and prejudiced view of KC3, IMO, he really seems obsessed with being nasty and rude and it shows time and time again when he does his “interviews” with his Buddy Dan on GB. Never misses a chance to sink the boot into KC3, which I think is a shame because that only damages TB’s reputation.
I’ve also noticed that, he seems to have set in his own mind that The King is weak. I personally think it takes much more strength to hold quietly to your values in the face of the constant barrage, particularly with Harry and Harry’s wife. I did enjoy Robert Jobson’s “ Our King”, and Tom Bowers “ Revenge” and I appreciate your balanced reviews Shauna.❤
I knew you would give me a lotto think about with this review and you didn’t disappoint me ! Thank you so much Shauna I really enjoy your channel 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🙏🙏🌺🌺💐💐💐
@@thevintageread I do not pay a tv licence, Netflix or anything else other than UA-cam I really like to give little but often - especially if I’ve enjoyed watching or watching learnt something There are a few channels I do this with but I shall respect your wishes
@@thevintageread you are the only you tuber, sounds like a root vegetable !, that does not coyly say a cup of coffee is always appreciated, when thanking
Tom bowers does not like KC3 he will forever print what sells not always truthfully. He acts spitefully and is stirring up old lies. Must be joining the harkles bandwagon. More money in it for him.
This is old news, Paul Burrell who has always been untrustworthy and has always been in question. He is still feeding off of Princess Diana from his time with her. I can't stand him.
Same here. He was interviewed a lot during the run-up to the coronation, and it was always about Diana. In one interview, he poured out his love for her…for him she is the only one….in such way, I cringed.
I'm not a fan of Burrell. He sniffed a money cow and is still milking it. If he destroyed the tapes he gets a gold star averting sordid drama on MF, Diana and Charles. I think his true and only motive was to save himself.
Reading this book was actually what made me dislike Tom Bower. He himself a barrister, but he PUSHED AFFRONT the unverified story on George Smith, who had a background in severe depression, alcoholism, PTSD, etc. Rumour surrounding the (then) Prince Charles and his aide was already debunked HUNDREDS of time, and it was a deliberate decision by Tom Bower to make it the focus, just to cloud people to have a "darker" judgement on Charles - well, such typical behaviour for a Marxist like Tom Bower. Of course Diana made a cameo, she was actually doing it as revenge to Charles. As she also delivered MANY tapes to News of the World around the time, with the intention to collaborate with the media in bringing down the (then) Heir to the Throne. Diana was furious with Charles' staffs as they were the ones who caused Barry Manneke, her first "affair", to be posted elsewhere, and it broke her heart knowing that he died a couple of years later in a car accident. Diana has BPD and Paranoia, the INQUEST on her accident in Paris all had documents proving this - that's where I based my opinion on. You can see how she always changes her story. Even Charlie Rae, at the time worked for The Sun, once confronted her about this. And Diana did not even remember which "version" of the story she once told Charlie. This annoyed him. Richard Kay, like Dan Wooton, is a Diana SIMP. Andrew Morton was too, but he couldn't cash in on the Coronation since he was interviewed by Piers Morgan. One of the very few who knew the REAL Diana. Morton wouldn't dare lie in front of Piers, LOL! Even her brother, The Earl Spencer, "hinted" on this, And Diana's brother in law and sister still work at the palace to this day, still close to Charles - I think THEY would know more about the TRUE DIANA than any others. You even said it yourself, how after reading this you just wanted to see William, Catherine and their warm and nice family, right? MISSION ACCOMPLISHED - that was EXACTLY what Tom Bower (and Diana) AIMED for: to cast DOUBT and cloud people's judgement on Charles. All of those based on a story that, in the court of LAW, actually count as HEARSAY. Tom Bower, a barrister, writing a book with focusing on a HEARSAY of story - how VERY unreliable. Stories in this book were based on THAT and on accounts of Paul Burrel, who he himself caught stealing from Diana's apartment. What I find borderline abusive was actually how he wrote Charles asked his staffs to help him with his toothpaste, to paint Charles as entitled. But Dickie Arbiter, who was working THERE at the time, said, it was due to the Prince had a broken arm and had to wear a SLING. This was also confirmed by Prince Charles former private secretary. Isn't that great for Tom Bower how he interpret that situation? Marvellous, how very "barrister-style" of him (NOT). Wasn't that some sort of ridicule? Would a respected barrister actually do that? Of course not. This is exactly what Diana wanted at the time, as REVENGE on Charles: for people to doubt Charles and pass the throne to William. People who said Diana was NOT Anti-Monarchy, don't realise what the monarchy is all about. Monarchy is about hierarchy. Passing the throne to William is NOT IT. It's as simple as that! Look back at old newspaper articles where they were doing INQUEST for her accident, how it was found out she actually supported MANY Abolish The Monarchy campaigns on TV. You can even see how MANY still have this opinion (King William better than King Charles, OVERHYPING William in the process - which is NEVER a good sign. Many of those people only know the "headline version/unverified gossip version" of Charles, and knows Diana as "Saint Diana" and Camilla as Home-wrecker). I admire your genuine reaction which I'm sure also shared by many who had read this book. People were already caught up in this clouded judgement of Charles, they wouldn't bother to look back and even deep dives or check the MAIN sources and his background (in this case, George Smith). People would ignore the fact that this "HEARSAY STORY" wasn't worth to be the centre of the book (it was HEARSAY, even in court it was RARELY admissible, now the author - a barrister himself - want people to believe this as if they're all reliable facts?). It was only "the MARXIST in Tom Bower" that can make this HEARSAY becomes the FOCUS/CENTRE of his book. I do agree with you regarding SPARE, hence why, in terms of Harry telling his story, I am NEVER against it. And I think even his family would also understand his need to tell his story. However, if it was ever so toxic for Harry, how come he only realised it since 2017? The truth was, it was toxic when it was a revolving door for Diana's lovers and for Paul Burrell to hide himself being gay from his wife. But after those two were gone (ie: after "War of the Wales" Saga and aftermath of Diana's death) all was well. Until along came Meghan. Tom Bower and Diana sort of achieved their goals, but thankfully the (then) Prince has much thicker skin than people imagine and in the end TRUTH will always win. I was lucky to stumble upon the articles on Tom Bower Marxist Past FIRST before reading his book, so I already know his background, his agenda, and his motivation. Otherwise, I might be "stuck" in my clouded judgement on Prince Charles, without even bother to verify everything afterwards. This happens to A LOT OF PEOPLE. People think Tom Bower, being a barrister, is reliable and to be trusted - NOT FOR ME. I wouldn't trust a barrister with a Marxist past, cleverly "twisting" a HEARSAY story as focus of his book. XOXO, ARN
I didn't know Tom Bowers' background except that he was a barrister, but I knew myself something wasn't right, at first when he wrote revenge I thought he was OK but since then hearing him in interviews I thought he wasn't trust worthy. He's arrogant and bombastic. He's the only one who keeps saying Charles needs to take action and speak out against Harry and Meghan when everyone else is saying silence is the best policy. Now I know why. He also knew whatever he put in his book that were hearsay wouldn't be answered by the RF because of their never complained, never explain policy. I'm so glad you explained this because I'm tired of people always trashing the King and saying he should give the throne to William. William knows his father better than anyone, and they have a close and loving relationship
Well Michael Fawcett is still under investigation for the donation for knighthood scandal and he was a major part of Then Prince Charles work so many would be interested in this book. I centred on him in the review not KC.
This was so interesting because I remember bits and pieces of the happenings at the time and there after but really never put it all together. It is definitely something to contemplate.
I recall rumors that then Prince Charles employed a valet that was homosexual. The implication was that the Prince himself also shared that sexual interest. Even back them, I was impressed that the Prince resisted the knee jerk reaction address those rumors and distance himself from that employee simply to avoid idol gossip. It seems that Charles was, once again, ahead of his time.
People aren't just good or just bad. We're a mix in varying degrees. The same goes for king Charles, Tom Bower, Paul Burrell and Michael Fawcett too. It just depends on which way the scales tip. I do not like how palace staff is treated when a wolf is amongst them, whether the wolf is another employee or a member of the family. It still isn't a very safe environment to be working in. I told my youngest son that there is a camera/editing position at the palace and he instantly declined. The mention of having worked for the BRF on his CV doesn't make up for the stressful environment and low payment.
I see two very strong women. Camilla confronting "downstairs" staff, after all upstairs attempts failed. Same with Diana with George. Both these women are good at finding out what's really going on. Or perhaps I see that bc I'm also a Cancerian married to a Scorpio 😂
Thank you for making this video, I really enjoyed it, I remember a lot of the George Smith story being in the newspaper many moons ago, it was dismissed by both the police and the palace, (2 separate investigations ) its all very sad and I feel he was used by Diana when he was mentally ill and slowly recovering, the apple really doesn't fall far from the tree with Harry, also you have opened my eyes about Tom Bower, ll be giving him a miss from now on
I won't be reading Tom Bowers on the subject of King Charles. Judging from his pre-Coronation interviews, he actively dilikes Charles, sees his sensitivity and environmental concerns as weakness, and thinks he's too left-wing. Plus he's super smug and pompous. 😊
I don't suppose there are any sour grapes, exaggerations, vengeance, little white lies, gossip, innuendo, rumours, etc. etc. in any book with staff input? Just wondering. Of course I always believe everything I read. I have been reading about royals for 50 years and the main thing I've learned is that there is more than one side and we never hear the royal side, do we?
Well if the assault is true I feel very sorry for that man as it is devastating to finally get courage to disclose, and then not only do people not believe them but actively try to discredit them. Having a mental illness dies not mean they are not tellung the truth. Disgusting. So if it is true that is despicable for Charles to be involved in that. All that aside the stories confirm to me what I have always thought of Charles- that he appears to be a stubborn, petulant man who wants his own way regardless of the truth or how it affects people. I think he is very concerned about his image and his " values" appear to swing with what looks best for him. Also makes me think this is why he will tolerate the H & M rubbish- he knows about his own misdeeds and probably knows that he got away with a lot himself. Hmmmm
Michael Fawcett was discussed at length in Valentine Low's *Courtiers* [which gives insight into all the male Windsors IMO], and one can see why KC was hesitant to give him up. Nasty bit of business he is that Michael.
The rumour must have been quite strong for Diana to tape the conversation with George Smith. Her motive may really have been out of concern for her children. It is sad that the truth was never determined, and just put down to delusional stories from a damaged man. A damaged person is often the person a predator targets. Charles and Camilla still have not completely won me over yet. I hope my opinion improves though.
Funny thing is when William gave that lovely speech at the concert that won me over. I thought he has genuine affection for his Father so there must be good in there!
Absolutely. Makes it so much harder to believe Harrys' complaints. I feel that Charles always did display a genuine love for his boys. The visible comfort between the Wales family and the King and Camilla cannot be feigned.
I think stories have been killed for a long time to protect RF's members and other powerful/famous people. And yes, that included Harry. It is probably still going on in fact. S And never forget that those famous/powerful are surrounded by staff that are driven by ambition, wanting to make $$ etc so yes, it is a dirty business at times.
this is so interesting, just the other day Tom Bower was being interviewed and was asked about his book about King Charles, and Tom Bowers said that he felt that King Charles had worked on himself after his book came out....that he is better with his staff....Bower said at least the King did make changes in himself and that showed a person willing to change for the better.....I have never read the book.
I also saw an interview with Tom Bower in which he remarked that the King had made positive and necessary changes in himself based upon the recommendations that Mr. Bower had made in his book. Hmmm.
Thank you for your work and for your fair-minded attitude. I, too, am not exactly happy to hear about this. At least, i guess, it was quite some time ago...
Where there is power and fame, there is corruption. If not by the major players, then by those who surround them. There used to be a TV show called 'Yes, Minister' followed by another called 'Yes, Prime Minister'. While the focus is on the Civil Service, the same games are played everywhere, just often, not as well. The issue with the RF is that for centuries, they operated in complete privacy, very little or no information got out without approval. Now, it is much harder to keep anything quiet. You can't have servants everywhere and not get things leaking out, no matter what NDA's are in place. To add to that, you have a whole load of self important, spoiled, adults who are not used to anyone saying 'no' to them. It doesn't make for great working conditions and, like in years past, if you fall out of favour, you're out. At least you still get to leave with your head these days.
I've always had the impression that Paul Burrell would protect Diana to the end. Maybe that is why he kept the tapes so they wouldn't be used against her. It is not a good look for her. I'm very disappointed to hear that she did this. Asking a trauma victim for all the details is pretty disgusting, doing it twice beggars belief.
Thank you, for this one & for reading the books! Your piece is very interesting! Some of the shenanigans that goes on behind the scenes, can be eye popping. I don’t mean to change the subject, maybe it’s a tangent? My daughter (a determined Sugar, (I KNOW!) sent me a link, to an article about the current court case, H is involved in. Evidently, the company which owns “The Daily Mail” has said, the sources to many of H’s complaints about specific stories, came from Palace INSIDERS. I cannot believe it is possible to loath H & MM, even more. Does the Brit press have the same freedoms as the US freedom of the Press? Occasionally, in my country, reporters will go to jail (contempt of court) rather than identify sources. Do we know how “The Mail” will handle this? I suppose we’ll find out soon enough. What a nightmare! Thanks again. Patty fm Philly.
The Charles and Diana's eara was doomed from the start. And Diana was very young and not as wise about the goings on in the RF and staff as Charles was very aware. I can't imagine how a person would feel going into a family who had absolute control. Everything was always hushed up back in thoes days. I don't think that could happen the same in today's world.
I read Tom Bower's book when it first came out. Both Michael Fawcett & Paul Burrell are suspect creatures. The new King did not come across well in the book...rather snarky to me.
Its appalling to suggest it didn’t happen because he was suffering ptsd, depression, alcoholism etc. just appalling. Fragile people are often targeted by predators.
I'm going to say something that might be a little controversial, but I'd like to say before I do, that I was very young with Prince Charles married the then Lady Diana, and I was always fascinated with her, and I tended to believe that she was always right and everything she said was the 'gospel' truth. I still admire and love Princess Diana, but in the 25 years or so since her untimely death, there have been tapes released of her speaking both for the Andrew Morton book and in the video she allowed to be taken whenever she was getting help to learn how to make better speeches, that contradict each other. Her stories, do not always 'add up." I get that 'recollections may vary." but considering the time frame between the Morton tapes and the videos, there is not a huge amount of time that passed, so the 'recollections' should be similar. My point in making this comment is, maybe the reason Prince Charles (at the time) did not take Diana's concerns seriously about the incident, is because he had learned over the years that Diana sometimes 'blew things out of proportion' and given his own investigation and his own relationship with Michael, he opted to trust his own instincts. I don't know what the truth of the situation was, but I do know and please do not get me wrong, I like Tom Bower, but I do know that Tom Bower is NOT a fan of King Charles, he thinks he is too weak to be king. Something he said over and over leading up to the Coronation. I would take the allegations in the book with a pinch of salt.
Good point Diana was difficult and dysfunctional, and important to question her motivations. KC3 had ro read into many of her words and actions this way. All is unreliable, from Diana, and also Tom Bowers writings from his anti KC3 blatent sentiment
Do you really like Tom Bower and his work!???😮 I definitely don't!!! He don't know what the truth looks like, even if it hits him between eyes ! He always mix his own opinion in, and suddenly it becomes facts!!!
Whoadaddy. I remember this but it was buried deep in my mind. I had an antipathy towards Charles but I had forgotten the details. Thank you very much for bringing this up and putting it in perspective. My eyebrows are a’twichin, humm….
I’ve put comments about Tom Bower before. He’s a good writer but he doesn’t seem to be a Monarchist and he’s always been very critical about King Charles which often verges on the personal. I heard a story (apparently from the book) that Charles had got someone to put toothpaste on his brush, showing he was unreasonable. However, it seems that Charles had broken his wrist (which is why he needed help) but Bowers didn’t include that
It seems to me a lot of those Authors writing about the royals true or false stories do it for Money..they know the RF doesn't take anyone to court...so they are a easy Target....I haven't bought any of those books nor the Spare... And Iam glad ...
I’m only a couple seconds into this video I don’t really have time to watch the whole thing right now, but on a recent interview Tom Bower mentioned that his book 📕 on King Charles was very critical… and that he felt he had switched up a bunch of things since the book came out with a strong implication if not directly saying (I don’t remember verbatim) that Charles was listening to him and doing what he recommended. 😂 I have no idea, but I have heard many times (and it seems from the sample I read so far) that Mr. Bower does do a lot of research from sea to shining sea. Either way, whether because he’s a kiss ass, or he really sees it that way… he seems happier with the work Charles is doing now… Or whatever he’s doing differently since I haven’t read either book.
Many people have said that King Charles has a big heart and likes to believe the good in everyone. I wonder if certain people take great advantage of the Kings' good nature and trust?
I have no doubt there is quite a bit of truth to a lot of this scandal. Charles is not immune from making stupid decisions in his life. Neither am I. So many of us want the king to be a perfect person, so it is hard to hear that he isn’t. neither are those who surround him.
You might consider reading Charles - The Alternative Prince (new edition The Alternative King) by Edzard Ernst. It gives even another facette to the character of King Charles.
Wow...that brings back some memory. I remember now bits and pieces of different accusations. Many of them were on front page covers in magazines all over Europe. These stories are troubling and heartbreaking. Do we know how George Smith had died? Or what we were told he'd died of? Now he can RIP. Poor guy.
You can always count on Bower to overdramatize everything. That said, I firmly believe that Fawcett (in some sense) was blackmailing Charles for many years. He was a louse of the highest order. Valentine Low may have some insights into that era and without the Bower dramatics.
I'm listening to this story and I am astonished that Charles is crying and undecided about what to do. It would seem that we were talking about a 14 year old boy; not, a 45 year old man. Just how weak is Charles?
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Remember I am only reviewing this… I didn’t write it! I left out the worst bits! It is interesting and confronting and it will lead to robust discussion I’m sure! When I implied Diana would be concerned about William and Harry it had nothing to do with anyone being gay or straight… it was concerning the alleged sexual assault which is an act of violence. ❤
Wow this is something!
I just got this book! 😳😱
Don't apologise. I loved your review. Unfortunately, the Charles versus Diana story is emotionally charged, evidenced by how people have added the word "secretly" taped when "secret was never mentioned. You seem to have landed in a nest of Charles supporters or Lady Colin followers. There will always be a lot of people waiting to tear Diana down to make their King look bigger. I wish they would all go hug a landmine to get over it. JMO
PS I love your videos. I used to watch Dan Wooton and Megyn Kelly but I've gone off them. Their videos now appear to be a Harry-bashing show. Your videos are more even.
Interesting talk, as always, and as you said, plenty of material for discussion. If Diana was worried about her sons being assaulted she would have moved heaven and earth to keep them out of posh English boarding schools, which are notorious for that kind of thing. Whatever her motive for taking recordings, I doubt it had anything to do with protecting her children.
Isn’t it ironic that Harry is spending so much money and energy fighting against the very thing his mother was guilty of. Secretly recording conversations. 🤭
Not sure it was secret? George Smith may have given her permission? Bower didn’t say…
And his wife too
There was no mention of "secretly", you added that bit to please your bias.
Diana definitely planted stories. It's good to have a source along with Lady C telling us that Diana and Richard Kay were in contact. Lady C said Diana often called Richard Kay to leak/plant stories and seeing she borrowed his equipment, backs up the idea they were on easy speaking terms.
@@jasminetyana2426 I have found when regular people (not reporters) record conversations it is more than 90% done secretly. Not a bias. Just being realistic. Sounds like you have your biases.
If the story of Diana recording someone (unbeknownst to him) while he is telling her his personal secrets in confidence while recovering from mental stress in a hospital, is true then Diana is a despicable character, even if she'd only done it once.
Yet, she repeated it.
Diana did that many times. You can google the inquest on her death, her former protection officer spill everything.
I’m not sure… because Bower doesn’t say… but it may have been with George Smith’s consent.
@@thevintageread still highly unethical since a person in such an unstable state of mind is extremely vulnerable and not in the right condition to make important decisions.
It's OK to record someone with their permission. George Smith may have even welcomed it or asked to be recorded. Try not to jump to biased conclusions.
Intriguing! I want to support the new King (and it may be that Charles has repented of any wrongdoing) but, we badly need a more transparent and egalitarian working system across the whole Palace.
I’m sorry for King Charles a man unhappy in his early life now blackmailed and slandered for seeking comfort wherever. He s entitled to a private life like any of us
This review wasn’t about that though… it was about allegations and drama surrounding Fawcett.
It is enough with harry and meghan's negativity ...
I feel once again that people seem to have missed something. Why did diana twice record this poor man secretly. I don't think it was for his benefit but for Diana's. More ammunition against Charles. The second attempt to record him was with the help of a tabloid. I'm not saying Charles is perfect but its unbelievable how everything is his fault and those around him are blameless. I think you should deep dive Diana's motives.
It didn’t specify secretly… George Smith may have given her permission.
I agree..
I am no fan of sly Di...and Harry is his mother's son ,two faced,paranoid and loving of attention . Attention was like a drug fort Diana...
Remember they recorded Diana while she was on the phone ... The War of the Waleses was a dirty one. I remember it, as am of the same age as H. and Prince William.
@@thevintageread I certainly hope George Smith gave her his permission! To secretly tape someone talking about such a personal, private and deeply traumatic event would be unconscionable. I've always loved Diana and don't want to believe she could do something like that.
Using someone, who wasn't mentally well, to discredit your ex-husband is really despicable. It sounds like they all played this game. Shakespeare truly understood royalty.
George Smith's life was absolutely a tragedy. What a shame for that poor young man
The Burrell story is interesting. I always thought it was a nice piece of largesse by the late Queen not to pursue in court a long serving employee. Didn't occur to me that he might have kept a little something up his sleeve! I think someone should write a book on Bower. Says he's a monarchist but talks like a closet republican. Takes his animosity toward the King to the point of silliness at times.
Really interesting idea!
Agree with you especially on the last point. Someone should write about him and how he wants to cash in now by changing the title of the book when Charles is king for only 3 minutes😂😂😂
@@liena7907 You nailed it!
I agree with you also. I saw him on one of the coverages for the coronation and cashes and trades in on the close association with Diana where she 'gifted him' all those items apparently. He was on Australia I'm a Celebrity, along with a 'psychic' that connected with Princess Diana in spirit (gag as i write). Teared up and talked about their 'special relationship'.
There is something about Tom Bower I thoroughly dislike. He's arrogant and bombastic. I would like to see a book written about him myself
Regardless of what any author, footman, inside source says, their is still a lot that goes on within that family that we will never know. I am happy for the BRF to get on with the job they to do, and I am so pleased it is them and not me having to do it. As Dame Maggie Smith says in a Downton Abbey episode, everyone goes down the aisle with only half the story told.
Our Royal Family are not perfect and I don't expect them to be. I am just happy and respectful of the awesome job that they do.
Great said it .
I don’t feel like Charles needs to be trashed any more than he already has been. I also think if anyone looks guilty here it’s Paul Burrell. I’m not quite sure what the implication about Charles is here. Diana doesn’t look too good either
I am reviewing a book, I didn’t write it! But I understand your reaction (on reading your comment again) It is hard to know what Bower is getting at…
@@thevintageread I know you didn’t write it, but you did say you’d be interested to know what we think about it
@@kirri1312 i personally did not sense or catch any implication about KC either directly or indirectly. The lady is reviewing a book and the characters within. Telling a story basically.
@@kirri1312 I apologize I am dealing with a bit of a pile on behind the scenes and it affects me sometimes. A lot of people really over react! Thanks for commenting x
@@ptrpan61 I think I over reacted to the comment but I really appreciate your kindness, thanks. ❤
You wouldn't want to be a royal for anything. Their lives are under the microscope and what is viewed there has many interpretations. We are fascinated because their existence is so different from ours. People like Paul Burrell and Tom Bower have made a living out of giving their versions of the stories. They take every financial opportunity to give their own opinions.
Totally agree with you.
Exactly. They didn't ask to be born into the Royal family. I wish that William would take his lovely family and go and live a happy life away from all the negativity and hatred.
If I suddenly became famous and someone decided to write a book about me they would be able to dig up some true and not so true gossip about me and throw in the few manipulators that I have crossed paths with and I would become the person the author wanted me to become in their book.
Diana liked to manipulate and I think the Queen headed her of at the pass a few times.
That is very true and it can be said of every Biography ever written!
Hello Shauna, thank you for delving into the books we’d like to read if we had more time. I am enjoying your nuanced reviews and your insights where you question the logic, the story line, the writers, or the cast of characters. Your commentary is lively, humorous, and sympathetic when warranted. Thank you for taking the time to create your literary videos. They are always enjoyable, fun, and thought provoking.
Thanks Erin 💗
I love the way you put things forth - balanced with just the hint of mischief and intrigue to make things interesting.
You look lovely and you are charming.
Bless you.
That’s really kind (and what I aim for…) thanks x
you are so talented at story telling, please never stop, ignore the negative ( i read your comment about a pile on) sending you a huge hug xx
😂 Always worse at the end of the day! I need to toughen up to be a UA-camr! 💗😊
Sorry but was nasty person tapes a person when they are at the priory. Just makes me dislike Diana more.
Agree, but oddly enough I think this revelation was probably designed to make Diana appear kind and caring
I didn’t say secretly or without permission but I completely understand your point. He would have been very vulnerable.
@@thevintageread exactly, Diana should have known better than to tape someone when they are vulnerable. Diana behaviour in some aspects is very questionable.
@@avm9647 Diana had two very different sides to her personality. That's why from early Diana I never took to her.
@Xhogun I agree. One thing I am happy for is that the King has been crowned, and William has inherited the best of his mother and father, Diana was devious and manipulative but she did do some good later in her life before she died. William has that good part, both he and the king have a strong loving bond with each other, that's really obvious. I probably won't be around to see William crowned but he will make a good king and his family will be a generation of wonderful royals to support him
The thing about Harry referring people to Bowers book is....there is also a rather insightful one about his wife! you can't have it both ways.
They say, be careful who you let onto your ship, because some people will sink the whole ship just because they can’t be the Captain.
Charles has more than staff & authors to contend with, his own son’s on the loose with more cannons to fire it seems. Charles will need Camilla to sort a few more maybe.
Never believe blindly or idolize without question anyone. Time will show truth.
I forgot who made a video that was here on UA-cam I watched I think Lady C. It described how William was called to the principal's office of his school when his mother's interview came out. He asked to see it. He was furious with his mother and said that it was his family she spoke about. Since then my obsession with Diana changed. She also wanted bring down the Royals and had to be reminded by her child that it is his family, his father and this weekend he showed the world whatever the "know it alls say" he loves his fater
I don't believe a word Lady Colin says. I don't follow people who start petitions to remove others' titles when they them self kept their title after only 14 months of marriage. Interesting how she calls herself Lady C and not Lady Colin.
I remember watching it . I think King Charles has been treated unfairly he can’t win for losing. Prince William loves his father unconditionally.
Thank you for reading the book so we don't have to! ❤ It sounds like Princess Diana was trying to get some sort of revenge against Prince Charles. If she was really concerned about the young princes safety, I think she would have taken swift/legal action to keep the boys away from Highgrove. Tom Bower, likes controversy and will criticize King Charles and Meghan Markle in the same sentence. Tom Bower's interviews with Dan Wooten are always negative, like he's trying to create drama and chaos.
I agree. When listening to TB on different channels I’ve noticed that tinge of negativity or a litter bit of an antagonist thought
or statement hardly noticed. Then as it sinks in,you just realize what you’ve heard. For me his saying how much damage Harry
and his wife are causing the Royals, I think, no . The lies, inconsistencies and stories from his book ,make them look damaged.
Legal action against the heir to the throne, are you even serious? Anyway, nice review, thank you.
I have noticed over all the interviews Tom Bower is giving he doesn’t like the Monarchy and wants it gone. I wouldn’t trust anything he says.
On what grounds would Diana take legal action? It would be baseless, without presenting the evidence from George Smith. Any mother would want to keep her boys away from a suspected sexual predator. Not revenge. Love for her boys. We will probably never know.
@@marybarry6408and the invading of privacy of others. He could have made all his points without that, may be even better. Because most of his examples are very childish.
I watched the lost tapes on Diana. They were videos done of her to help her learn public speaking techniques as she was really bad at the beginning. She had leaked stuff to Andrew Morton for the book. She talked about her childhood and how they were left by the mother, her insecurities, etc. I think it shows what Diana was really like. Extremely immature, demanding. I believe she enjoyed the attention she was getting and she was jealous of Camilla because she didn’t have the love from Charles. It wasn’t the Disney version of marrying a prince and more like the Grimms Brothers fairytales. I honestly think Harry is more like her and William just has her looks and the compassion.
Nailed it . Diana had serious mental issues .
Married at 19 years old. She is the victim of this family. Harry is not her, unfair.
Charles was 12yrs older than Diana. I thought from the very beginning that it was an arranged marriage. Charles courted Dianas sister first. Charles always loved Camilla, but he dragged his heels, so Camilla married Bower. Marriages in haste rarely work. I'm glad Charles and Camilla got back together and married, they both put up with a lot of bad press, and got through it. x
@@shirleyjones4857you are spot on! I concur with everything you say.
@@looloo4029 I agree with most of what Shirley says, except for 'Camilla married Bower'. That was a weird slip 🤣
Inevitably, the bigger a person’s life is, the messier it becomes. When many people are closely interacting with a person, that person will get sucked into their drama. KC has a big life, meaning, there are always dozens of people he is closely interacting with daily. The drama of his staff, whether it’s their personal relationships, jealousy, or fear, unfortunately, Charles will get pulled into some of the drama. I never thought Harry’s motivation for talking about his family was a need to tell the truth, expose hidden family secrets or clearing his reputation. He’s frankly too dumb to know what is true. His motivation is to make a lot of money. Greed. His advisors probably sat around a table with him when he left the UK, and after getting to know him, realized he has no talent, skills, is lazy and emotionally retarded. The irony is that if he was smart, he would have figured out a way to stay in good graces with the Queen and inherit a small fortune. Instead, he was taken out of her will. I understand why KC appears to be so forgiving and soft on Harry. Harry is a child-man who doesn’t have the sense to make good decisions. I have sympathy for the entire royal family. They have difficult, BIG lives.
You make some really sensible points. You are right! The bigger it is, the messier…
I agree
Have you read Charles: The Heart Of A King, by Catherine Mayer? It's very thorough, but less obsessive than Rebel Prince. Reminds me of Tina Brown's more recent Palace Papers in quality and tone, but focussed on Charles. It's hard to get a really objective picture of the Royals, so I find it's helpful to read a number of books/ opinions.
I have read many. I was asked to review this so I did…I loved Palace Papers because Tina Brown is such a good writer. I will check it out, thanks!
Tom Bower's wife was editor of Daily Mail,The Evening Standard....well connected to editorials...🧐🧐🧐
Really? I had no idea!
@@thevintageread yes...and Diana's first lover was another man. See Sally Morgan interviews. Diana's personal psychic 🔮🐇🐇🐇
You are so eloquent in your story telling. Truly explosive and tragic for that young man either way.
Yes I feel like telling George Smiths story was right…
Yes, except it didn't happen there's a very good comment on here that goes into depth to explain this
Michael Fawcett, aid to Charles, caught up in an alleged sex scandal involving an underling. Louis Mountbatten, uncle to Charles, caught up in an alleged sex scandal related to a boy's orphanage in Ireland. Yes. I wish I wasn't aware of these things.
i've not heard of that re mountbatten; any further details ?
I’m going to skip this review if you don’t mind because I think the King has suffered enough with Spare. I will hold onto the little good faith he’s got in my heart atm. 😬 Happy weekend to you ❤
I focus on characters around the King, not the King himself x
@@thevintageread Cool thanks!
It's interesting, another UA-cam creator said that after reading Spare, her thought of King Charles was that Charles was quite a lovely man. Harry? Not so much.
Charles is far from perfect. What about his book bashing his mother, don't like Harry but..karma. Never respected him, still don't.
@@sidneybales9062 I do too. My trick was, just don't include Harry's interpretation of the situation. His opinions and comments put aside = you'll see his TRUE FEELINGS for his father. Gyles Brandreth was the one who "hinted" on This Morning, that that was what he did. And I followed.
Michael fawcett power & treatment of staff below him reminds me of another royal staff member that got too big for his britches was the Queen Mums head of the back stair William Tallon who was the queen mums top go to jack of all trades senior staff . Theres a video on Wiliam Tallon which shows the good bad & ugly of his lifes duty & how he treated people
Harry wanted to disparage William because Harry is/ was so jealous of him. That’s why he wrote Spare.
True, but there were other rea$on$, 20 million of them.
I was surprised Charles didn't cut Fawcett adrift after his involvement in the cash for honour scandal.
If Harry referred to Tom Bower’s book The Rebel King he would risk simultaneously bringing attention to Revenge.
Also Harry might not know the stories in The Rebel King
Loved your review and analysis, loved all the comments and differing takes on the various elements in this story. I’ve learned a lot and thoroughly enjoyed it all! I do appreciate how extremely difficult it can be dealing with some of the backlash, which is utterly foolish and childish on their part. You are doing a brilliant job! Much love and respect from 🇨🇦
💗
Thank you for sharing your understanding of this story. I have just finished reading Tom Bowers book and was totally horrified by the contents. It opens up so many new - and troubling perspectives.
Yes it is very confronting!
It would appear that George Smith was "thrown under the bus" as it were. Karma finally caught up with Michael Fawcett. Makes one think "how many others???" did this man destroy. Also it makes one realise that Prince Charles is as guilty as Prince Andrew in regards to very poor judgement!!! It leaves an appalling taste and is eceptionally tawdry.
I loathe bullies and the harm they cause their victims. That they are supported at all is appalling but in this case by someone who holds such station!! Lack of strength to deal with honour and integrity, in the face of dishonour is unacceptable. But what is the saying "Absolute power corrupts absolutely". Very, very sad and I am disillusioned. Feet of clay. Beware of idols. Don't go putting people on pedestals.
Maybe I can understand Tom Bowers vitriol.
I felt the same way… I felt quite shocked and let down!
Explosive show! As an American I , as much as I appreciate the RF, never knew of all this intrigue! Like you though I’m not sure I want to know! 🫣 Love your channel!
Yes I found it an upsetting read… but that’s why it is interesting!
I feel that it’s quite unfair to slag KC off for being human,caring what happens to planet earth,wanting ,in his acceptance of the role he inherited,to be modern and inclusive.Apparently this makes him worthy of being mocked.Does it really?
Amazing….amazing presentation. A blockbuster movie if there were such things anymore. I think it’s explosive to say the least. Your take is fair and well done. Being American, nothing shocks me anymore.
I too look forward to the Wales’s but… not until the kids get older. They need this time.
I look forward to King Charles reign. He is a kind, intelligent, charming and empathetic man with focus on the topics that really matter.
Be careful on people who get OVERHYPED by the media. The Harry Meghan debacle make them look like angels, but what do the facts say? I myself is William fan but I don't look forward to his reign YET - it's super disrespectful to talk about it too. And I don't know, I like Charles being an Underdog, look how he successfully SHUT UP every critics. And William being OVERHYPED makes me worried. What has been his accomplishment? His father when 40 years old had already done many things - what has he done?
The facts aren't there yet, he just started. See what OVERHYPING is doing to him?
Unfortunately Tom Bower has a very biased and prejudiced view of KC3, IMO, he really seems obsessed with being nasty and rude and it shows time and time again when he does his “interviews” with his Buddy Dan on GB. Never misses a chance to sink the boot into KC3, which I think is a shame because that only damages TB’s reputation.
It’s all very strange!
I've noticed that - I wonder why?
I’ve also noticed that, he seems to have set in his own mind that The King is weak. I personally think it takes much more strength to hold quietly to your values in the face of the constant barrage, particularly with Harry and Harry’s wife. I did enjoy Robert Jobson’s “ Our King”, and Tom Bowers “ Revenge” and I appreciate your balanced reviews Shauna.❤
Many times when I see TB with Dan I switch off ..I find TB overbearing...
Did MM & H learn from Paul Burell how to get what they want?
I knew you would give me a lotto think about with this review and you didn’t disappoint me !
Thank you so much Shauna I really enjoy your channel 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼🙏🙏🌺🌺💐💐💐
Your welcome Val and thank you. But no more tips, that’s enough! I appreciate your kind support and I love seeing you pop up in the comments! X💗
@@thevintageread
I do not pay a tv licence, Netflix or anything else other than UA-cam
I really like to give little but often - especially if I’ve enjoyed watching or watching learnt something
There are a few channels I do this with but I shall respect your wishes
@@thevintageread you are the only you tuber, sounds like a root vegetable !, that does not coyly say a cup of coffee is always appreciated, when thanking
I laughed about the vegetable part 😂
Tom bowers does not like KC3 he will forever print what sells not always truthfully. He acts spitefully and is stirring up old lies. Must be joining the harkles bandwagon. More money in it for him.
Yes it shocked me!
This is old news, Paul Burrell who has always been untrustworthy and has always been in question. He is still feeding off of Princess Diana from his time with her. I can't stand him.
Same here. He was interviewed a lot during the run-up to the coronation, and it was always about Diana. In one interview, he poured out his love for her…for him she is the only one….in such way, I cringed.
Once I’d read Rebel Prince I couldn’t see Charles in the same light again.
I'm not a fan of Burrell. He sniffed a money cow and is still milking it. If he destroyed the tapes he gets a gold star averting sordid drama on MF, Diana and Charles. I think his true and only motive was to save himself.
Reading this book was actually what made me dislike Tom Bower. He himself a barrister, but he PUSHED AFFRONT the unverified story on George Smith, who had a background in severe depression, alcoholism, PTSD, etc.
Rumour surrounding the (then) Prince Charles and his aide was already debunked HUNDREDS of time, and it was a deliberate decision by Tom Bower to make it the focus, just to cloud people to have a "darker" judgement on Charles - well, such typical behaviour for a Marxist like Tom Bower.
Of course Diana made a cameo, she was actually doing it as revenge to Charles. As she also delivered MANY tapes to News of the World around the time, with the intention to collaborate with the media in bringing down the (then) Heir to the Throne.
Diana was furious with Charles' staffs as they were the ones who caused Barry Manneke, her first "affair", to be posted elsewhere, and it broke her heart knowing that he died a couple of years later in a car accident. Diana has BPD and Paranoia, the INQUEST on her accident in Paris all had documents proving this - that's where I based my opinion on. You can see how she always changes her story. Even Charlie Rae, at the time worked for The Sun, once confronted her about this. And Diana did not even remember which "version" of the story she once told Charlie. This annoyed him. Richard Kay, like Dan Wooton, is a Diana SIMP. Andrew Morton was too, but he couldn't cash in on the Coronation since he was interviewed by Piers Morgan. One of the very few who knew the REAL Diana. Morton wouldn't dare lie in front of Piers, LOL! Even her brother, The Earl Spencer, "hinted" on this, And Diana's brother in law and sister still work at the palace to this day, still close to Charles - I think THEY would know more about the TRUE DIANA than any others.
You even said it yourself, how after reading this you just wanted to see William, Catherine and their warm and nice family, right? MISSION ACCOMPLISHED - that was EXACTLY what Tom Bower (and Diana) AIMED for: to cast DOUBT and cloud people's judgement on Charles. All of those based on a story that, in the court of LAW, actually count as HEARSAY. Tom Bower, a barrister, writing a book with focusing on a HEARSAY of story - how VERY unreliable.
Stories in this book were based on THAT and on accounts of Paul Burrel, who he himself caught stealing from Diana's apartment. What I find borderline abusive was actually how he wrote Charles asked his staffs to help him with his toothpaste, to paint Charles as entitled. But Dickie Arbiter, who was working THERE at the time, said, it was due to the Prince had a broken arm and had to wear a SLING. This was also confirmed by Prince Charles former private secretary. Isn't that great for Tom Bower how he interpret that situation? Marvellous, how very "barrister-style" of him (NOT). Wasn't that some sort of ridicule? Would a respected barrister actually do that? Of course not.
This is exactly what Diana wanted at the time, as REVENGE on Charles: for people to doubt Charles and pass the throne to William. People who said Diana was NOT Anti-Monarchy, don't realise what the monarchy is all about. Monarchy is about hierarchy. Passing the throne to William is NOT IT. It's as simple as that! Look back at old newspaper articles where they were doing INQUEST for her accident, how it was found out she actually supported MANY Abolish The Monarchy campaigns on TV. You can even see how MANY still have this opinion (King William better than King Charles, OVERHYPING William in the process - which is NEVER a good sign. Many of those people only know the "headline version/unverified gossip version" of Charles, and knows Diana as "Saint Diana" and Camilla as Home-wrecker).
I admire your genuine reaction which I'm sure also shared by many who had read this book. People were already caught up in this clouded judgement of Charles, they wouldn't bother to look back and even deep dives or check the MAIN sources and his background (in this case, George Smith). People would ignore the fact that this "HEARSAY STORY" wasn't worth to be the centre of the book (it was HEARSAY, even in court it was RARELY admissible, now the author - a barrister himself - want people to believe this as if they're all reliable facts?). It was only "the MARXIST in Tom Bower" that can make this HEARSAY becomes the FOCUS/CENTRE of his book.
I do agree with you regarding SPARE, hence why, in terms of Harry telling his story, I am NEVER against it. And I think even his family would also understand his need to tell his story. However, if it was ever so toxic for Harry, how come he only realised it since 2017? The truth was, it was toxic when it was a revolving door for Diana's lovers and for Paul Burrell to hide himself being gay from his wife. But after those two were gone (ie: after "War of the Wales" Saga and aftermath of Diana's death) all was well. Until along came Meghan.
Tom Bower and Diana sort of achieved their goals, but thankfully the (then) Prince has much thicker skin than people imagine and in the end TRUTH will always win. I was lucky to stumble upon the articles on Tom Bower Marxist Past FIRST before reading his book, so I already know his background, his agenda, and his motivation. Otherwise, I might be "stuck" in my clouded judgement on Prince Charles, without even bother to verify everything afterwards. This happens to A LOT OF PEOPLE. People think Tom Bower, being a barrister, is reliable and to be trusted - NOT FOR ME. I wouldn't trust a barrister with a Marxist past, cleverly "twisting" a HEARSAY story as focus of his book.
XOXO,
ARN
Thankyou for your very detailed comment.
Wonderful you absolutely nailed it
@@thevintageread Anytime. And I do thank you for choosing a very respectful timing to talk about this. Always enjoy your review 😀
I didn't know Tom Bowers' background except that he was a barrister, but I knew myself something wasn't right, at first when he wrote revenge I thought he was OK but since then hearing him in interviews I thought he wasn't trust worthy. He's arrogant and bombastic. He's the only one who keeps saying Charles needs to take action and speak out against Harry and Meghan when everyone else is saying silence is the best policy. Now I know why. He also knew whatever he put in his book that were hearsay wouldn't be answered by the RF because of their never complained, never explain policy. I'm so glad you explained this because I'm tired of people always trashing the King and saying he should give the throne to William. William knows his father better than anyone, and they have a close and loving relationship
Absolutely amazing comment! You've blown my socks off with point after point!!! Well done. 😮😊
Drama and intrigue are expected in the Royal household. Charles wasn't raping anyone, so it is best left alone.
Well Michael Fawcett is still under investigation for the donation for knighthood scandal and he was a major part of Then Prince Charles work so many would be interested in this book. I centred on him in the review not KC.
I’ve never been a fan of Tom Bower, he is far too full of himself and puts everyone else down. He know the RF won’t prosecute
This was so interesting because I remember bits and pieces of the happenings at the time and there after but really never put it all together. It is definitely something to contemplate.
I recall rumors that then Prince Charles employed a valet that was homosexual. The implication was that the Prince himself also shared that sexual interest. Even back them, I was impressed that the Prince resisted the knee jerk reaction address those rumors and distance himself from that employee simply to avoid idol gossip. It seems that Charles was, once again, ahead of his time.
🙀 I have not heard this story 🤯
I don’t think Tom Bower likes the King
😂 Apparently not!
People aren't just good or just bad. We're a mix in varying degrees.
The same goes for king Charles, Tom Bower, Paul Burrell and Michael Fawcett too. It just depends on which way the scales tip.
I do not like how palace staff is treated when a wolf is amongst them, whether the wolf is another employee or a member of the family. It still isn't a very safe environment to be working in. I told my youngest son that there is a camera/editing position at the palace and he instantly declined. The mention of having worked for the BRF on his CV doesn't make up for the stressful environment and low payment.
Paul Burrell looks guilty to me he seems a bit slimy
Paints s very nasty picture of C&C. Are they bullies like Fawcett as well?
Karma will catch up with all of them😡
I listened to this and immediately got the book Rebel King ! And like yourself I wish I hadn’t. I am now confused !!
It is confronting!
They are only employees!
Not sure what that means…I hope it’s a joke! 😂
I see two very strong women. Camilla confronting "downstairs" staff, after all upstairs attempts failed. Same with Diana with George. Both these women are good at finding out what's really going on. Or perhaps I see that bc I'm also a Cancerian married to a Scorpio 😂
wow, I wonder if Diana thought she was "doing the right thing" outting a crime? thanks for that, i never knew that whole story
Yes I like to think that was her motivation…
Thank you for making this video, I really enjoyed it, I remember a lot of the George Smith story being in the newspaper many moons ago, it was dismissed by both the police and the palace, (2 separate investigations ) its all very sad and I feel he was used by Diana when he was mentally ill and slowly recovering, the apple really doesn't fall far from the tree with Harry, also you have opened my eyes about Tom Bower, ll be giving him a miss from now on
Yes the palace investigation was a little too close to home for comfort however I guess one must have faith in the Police!
Read Valentine Low's book Courtiers. He deals with Michael Fawcett.
Sounds like Paul had something in those 2,000 things that made the RF think twice. He’s a weasel.
The tapes? 😂
I won't be reading Tom Bowers on the subject of King Charles. Judging from his pre-Coronation interviews, he actively dilikes Charles, sees his sensitivity and environmental concerns as weakness, and thinks he's too left-wing. Plus he's super smug and pompous. 😊
Yes I understand…
I don't suppose there are any sour grapes, exaggerations, vengeance, little white lies, gossip, innuendo, rumours, etc. etc. in any book with staff input? Just wondering. Of course I always believe everything I read. I have been reading about royals for 50 years and the main thing I've learned is that there is more than one side and we never hear the royal side, do we?
There was input from others however I take your point.
George Smith was my uncle my mum would tell me about him when I was younger
I’m so sorry he suffered so much trauma x
Well if the assault is true I feel very sorry for that man as it is devastating to finally get courage to disclose, and then not only do people not believe them but actively try to discredit them. Having a mental illness dies not mean they are not tellung the truth. Disgusting. So if it is true that is despicable for Charles to be involved in that. All that aside the stories confirm to me what I have always thought of Charles- that he appears to be a stubborn, petulant man who wants his own way regardless of the truth or how it affects people. I think he is very concerned about his image and his " values" appear to swing with what looks best for him. Also makes me think this is why he will tolerate the H & M rubbish- he knows about his own misdeeds and probably knows that he got away with a lot himself. Hmmmm
I agree with a lot of what you said!
I disagree with a lot you said
Great review Shauna and thanks for your efforts❤❤❤❤❤❤
💗
Fascinating stuff!
Very good commentary! Thank you!
Michael Fawcett was discussed at length in Valentine Low's *Courtiers* [which gives insight into all the male Windsors IMO], and one can see why KC was hesitant to give him up. Nasty bit of business he is that Michael.
The rumour must have been quite strong for Diana to tape the conversation with George Smith. Her motive may really have been out of concern for her children. It is sad that the truth was never determined, and just put down to delusional stories from a damaged man. A damaged person is often the person a predator targets. Charles and Camilla still have not completely won me over yet. I hope my opinion improves though.
Funny thing is when William gave that lovely speech at the concert that won me over. I thought he has genuine affection for his Father so there must be good in there!
Absolutely. Makes it so much harder to believe Harrys' complaints. I feel that Charles always did display a genuine love for his boys. The visible comfort between the Wales family and the King and Camilla cannot be feigned.
I think stories have been killed for a long time to protect RF's members and other powerful/famous people. And yes, that included Harry. It is probably still going on in fact. S And never forget that those famous/powerful are surrounded by staff that are driven by ambition, wanting to make $$ etc so yes, it is a dirty business at times.
I’m sure there is still a lot we don’t know! 😂
this is so interesting, just the other day Tom Bower was being interviewed and was asked about his book about King Charles, and Tom Bowers said that he felt that King Charles had worked on himself after his book came out....that he is better with his staff....Bower said at least the King did make changes in himself and that showed a person willing to change for the better.....I have never read the book.
Interesting! Thanks for that 😊
I also saw an interview with Tom Bower in which he remarked that the King had made positive and necessary changes in himself based upon the recommendations that Mr. Bower had made in his book.
Hmmm.
@@theheartoftexas Tom Bower has allowed his success with his books to go to his head.
@@patsimpson7834 WORD! 👍
sounds like delusions of grandeur on bower's part, as if he advised charles !
Thank you for your work and for your fair-minded attitude. I, too, am not exactly happy to hear about this. At least, i guess, it was quite some time ago...
Where there is power and fame, there is corruption. If not by the major players, then by those who surround them. There used to be a TV show called 'Yes, Minister' followed by another called 'Yes, Prime Minister'. While the focus is on the Civil Service, the same games are played everywhere, just often, not as well. The issue with the RF is that for centuries, they operated in complete privacy, very little or no information got out without approval. Now, it is much harder to keep anything quiet. You can't have servants everywhere and not get things leaking out, no matter what NDA's are in place. To add to that, you have a whole load of self important, spoiled, adults who are not used to anyone saying 'no' to them. It doesn't make for great working conditions and, like in years past, if you fall out of favour, you're out. At least you still get to leave with your head these days.
I've always had the impression that Paul Burrell would protect Diana to the end. Maybe that is why he kept the tapes so they wouldn't be used against her. It is not a good look for her. I'm very disappointed to hear that she did this. Asking a trauma victim for all the details is pretty disgusting, doing it twice beggars belief.
I’m not sure but I think he wanted her to… the police didn’t know yet, there isn’t enough detail to tell you confidently.
Thank you, for this one & for reading the books! Your piece is very interesting! Some of the shenanigans that goes on behind the scenes, can be eye popping.
I don’t mean to change the subject, maybe it’s a tangent? My daughter (a determined Sugar, (I KNOW!) sent me a link, to an article about the current court case, H is involved in. Evidently, the company which owns “The Daily Mail” has said, the sources to many of H’s complaints about specific stories, came from Palace INSIDERS. I cannot believe it is possible to loath H & MM, even more. Does the Brit press have the same freedoms as the US freedom of the Press? Occasionally, in my country, reporters will go to jail (contempt of court) rather than identify sources. Do we know how “The Mail” will handle this? I suppose we’ll find out soon enough. What a nightmare!
Thanks again. Patty fm Philly.
VERY INTERESTING INDEED Thank you for all your hard work
Very welcome
Your video as usual is terrific!!
Is there a chapter on Jimmy Savile?
The Charles and Diana's eara was doomed from the start. And Diana was very young and not as wise about the goings on in the RF and staff as Charles was very aware.
I can't imagine how a person would feel going into a family who had absolute control.
Everything was always hushed up back in thoes days.
I don't think that could happen the same in today's world.
I read Tom Bower's book when it first came out. Both Michael Fawcett & Paul Burrell are suspect creatures. The new King did not come across well in the book...rather snarky to me.
Its appalling to suggest it didn’t happen because he was suffering ptsd, depression, alcoholism etc. just appalling. Fragile people are often targeted by predators.
Yes that is the really worrying aspect of this!
I'm going to say something that might be a little controversial, but I'd like to say before I do, that I was very young with Prince Charles married the then Lady Diana, and I was always fascinated with her, and I tended to believe that she was always right and everything she said was the 'gospel' truth. I still admire and love Princess Diana, but in the 25 years or so since her untimely death, there have been tapes released of her speaking both for the Andrew Morton book and in the video she allowed to be taken whenever she was getting help to learn how to make better speeches, that contradict each other. Her stories, do not always 'add up." I get that 'recollections may vary." but considering the time frame between the Morton tapes and the videos, there is not a huge amount of time that passed, so the 'recollections' should be similar. My point in making this comment is, maybe the reason Prince Charles (at the time) did not take Diana's concerns seriously about the incident, is because he had learned over the years that Diana sometimes 'blew things out of proportion' and given his own investigation and his own relationship with Michael, he opted to trust his own instincts. I don't know what the truth of the situation was, but I do know and please do not get me wrong, I like Tom Bower, but I do know that Tom Bower is NOT a fan of King Charles, he thinks he is too weak to be king. Something he said over and over leading up to the Coronation. I would take the allegations in the book with a pinch of salt.
Yes I always take everything with a pinch of salt! 😊😉
Good point
Diana was difficult and dysfunctional, and important to question her motivations. KC3 had ro read into many of her words and actions this way.
All is unreliable, from Diana, and also Tom Bowers writings from his anti KC3 blatent sentiment
Do you really like Tom Bower and his work!???😮
I definitely don't!!!
He don't know what the truth looks like, even if it hits him between eyes !
He always mix his own opinion in, and suddenly it becomes facts!!!
It got to be a SPY VS SPY🔮
Whoadaddy. I remember this but it was buried deep in my mind. I had an antipathy towards Charles but I had forgotten the details. Thank you very much for bringing this up and putting it in perspective. My eyebrows are a’twichin, humm….
Thank you for the super chat! I have just bought better lights and that will help! X
Interesting puzzle, why prince Harry did not point to informations about his father in Tom Bowers book. 😊
I’ve put comments about Tom Bower before. He’s a good writer but he doesn’t seem to be a Monarchist and he’s always been very critical about King Charles which often verges on the personal. I heard a story (apparently from the book) that Charles had got someone to put toothpaste on his brush, showing he was unreasonable. However, it seems that Charles had broken his wrist (which is why he needed help) but Bowers didn’t include that
It seems to me a lot of those Authors writing about the royals true or false stories do it for Money..they know the RF doesn't take anyone to court...so they are a easy Target....I haven't bought any of those books nor the Spare... And Iam glad ...
Sounds like alot of large workplaces, why didn't Harry buy the rights to that book, it would certainly be a better seller that a mushed up love story.
I’m only a couple seconds into this video I don’t really have time to watch the whole thing right now, but on a recent interview Tom Bower mentioned that his book 📕 on King Charles was very critical… and that he felt he had switched up a bunch of things since the book came out with a strong implication if not directly saying (I don’t remember verbatim) that Charles was listening to him and doing what he recommended. 😂 I have no idea, but I have heard many times (and it seems from the sample I read so far) that Mr. Bower does do a lot of research from sea to shining sea.
Either way, whether because he’s a kiss ass, or he really sees it that way… he seems happier with the work Charles is doing now… Or whatever he’s doing differently since I haven’t read either book.
He needs to write an updated version then!
I’m not a Tom Bower fan. I was so-so on his book about Harry and Meghan and I find him annoying on interviews.
I can see that…
Many people have said that King Charles has a big heart and likes to believe the good in everyone. I wonder if certain people take great advantage of the Kings' good nature and trust?
I have no doubt there is quite a bit of truth to a lot of this scandal. Charles is not immune from making stupid decisions in his life. Neither am I. So many of us want the king to be a perfect person, so it is hard to hear that he isn’t. neither are those who surround him.
SO JUICY because I bought Tom Bower's book a while back and haven't read it, yet! 👍👍👍
You might consider reading Charles - The Alternative Prince (new edition The Alternative King) by Edzard Ernst. It gives even another facette to the character of King Charles.
Wow...that brings back some memory. I remember now bits and pieces of different accusations. Many of them were on front page covers in magazines all over Europe. These stories are troubling and heartbreaking. Do we know how George Smith had died? Or what we were told he'd died of? Now he can RIP. Poor guy.
Internal bleeding, after having a long standing drink problem caused though what he had witnessed on Sir Galahad
I don't know, Paul always struck me as sleezy. There is just something about him and the way he talks that makes you doubt what he is saying.
You can always count on Bower to overdramatize everything. That said, I firmly believe that Fawcett (in some sense) was blackmailing Charles for many years. He was a louse of the highest order. Valentine Low may have some insights into that era and without the Bower dramatics.
I confess I only read the Harry and Meghan section for some research I will go back and read the whole thing!
I'm listening to this story and I am astonished that Charles is crying and undecided about what to do. It would seem that we were talking about a 14 year old boy; not, a 45 year old man. Just how weak is Charles?
Wow, thx so much for this video!