Author Topic: Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II  (Read 210137 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #450 on: June 06, 2011, 12:35:52 AM »
Truly, are there no depths to which this foolish creature will not plumb?

Whatever’s next for the sake of publicity….an appearance on ‘Embarrassing Bodies’?

PAVLOV

  • Guest
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #451 on: June 06, 2011, 07:21:18 AM »
Please will someone explain to me why the family has not forced Andrew to divorce this woman ? Surely there is no reason on earth for them to remain married. i think she has something on him, and i will not be in the least surprised if she is not blackmailing him with it. They ceretainly dont have to remain married "for the childrens sake " Just look at the children !!!!
I think Andrew is half to blame, how many times does she have to embarrass the guy before it is enough. He is a wimp in the first degree.

Sarah Ferguson goes on and on making one dreadfully embarrassing mistake after the other.
Where is it going to end ? She really is a HUGE embarrassment to the RF. Huge.

Offline Kalafrana

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2912
    • View Profile
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #452 on: June 06, 2011, 07:41:41 AM »
They actually divorced a long time ago.

Ann

Offline Eddie_uk

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2925
    • View Profile
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #453 on: June 06, 2011, 01:43:13 PM »
There was some talk about a year ago that they might being getting re-married! Heaven forbid!

Fergie is partly the reason why I am very pro royalty marrying fellow royalty, they understand the role! Though the Duchesses of Cornwall & Cambridge are doing brilliantly I will admit. 
Grief is the price we pay for love.

FREE PALESTINE.

CHRISinUSA

  • Guest
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #454 on: June 06, 2011, 02:37:28 PM »
So long as the Duke of Edinburgh has breath left in his body, there is little chance of a remarriage.  I think the old chap would sooner kill his middle son with his bare hands before he'd approve his remarriage with that woman.

Offline RoyalWatcher

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 440
    • View Profile
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #455 on: June 06, 2011, 04:24:17 PM »
Ha! Well said, Chris.

Offline grandduchessella

  • Global Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 13039
  • Getting Ready to Move to Europe :D
    • View Profile
    • Facebook page
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #456 on: June 07, 2011, 03:06:22 PM »
Remember when Philip was the villain (to some) in this piece? He's looking more correct in his assessment and behavior by the minute!
They also serve who only stand and wait--John Milton
Come visit on Pinterest--http://pinterest.com/lawrbk/

Offline Eddie_uk

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2925
    • View Profile
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #457 on: June 07, 2011, 03:24:11 PM »
In the same ghastly interview Fergie states press intrusion as being the cause for there marriage breakdown, of course it wouldn't be her fault would it!
Grief is the price we pay for love.

FREE PALESTINE.

Lindelle

  • Guest
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #458 on: June 07, 2011, 04:15:56 PM »
She also blamed Andrew for being away too long in the Navy.
Oh poor Sarah. While she could sit back in her choice of palace, whether it was Buckingham Palace or Sunninghill which was paid for by her mother-in-law anyway, other women had to get on with it.

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #459 on: June 07, 2011, 06:24:28 PM »
God, I hope people will never again criticise Diana for being "needy" when they hear this never-ending torrent of self-pitying nonsense.  It's time the Queen ordered Andrew to cut his ties with her, it really is.  She's beginning to do real damage now. 

Lindelle

  • Guest
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #460 on: June 08, 2011, 01:26:24 AM »
Cutting the ties would be great but alas Grace, that would only give her more to dwell on and more for us to have to endure from her.

Offline Kalafrana

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2912
    • View Profile
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #461 on: June 08, 2011, 03:22:26 AM »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'She also blamed Andrew for being away too long in the Navy.
Oh poor Sarah. While she could sit back in her choice of palace, whether it was Buckingham Palace or Sunninghill which was paid for by her mother-in-law anyway, other women had to get on with it.'

One elderly lady of my acquaintance had a father in the Navy. Three days after her parents' wedding her father went to the South African station for three years. No sooner did he return than the First World War broke out, and he was away for most of the next four years, with the result that she was an only child born after eight years of marriage!

My father was in the RAF and away a good deal. My mother coped, like most other service wives.

Ann

CHRISinUSA

  • Guest
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #462 on: June 08, 2011, 07:23:45 AM »
Remember when Philip was the villain (to some) in this piece? He's looking more correct in his assessment and behavior by the minute!

Quite.  I think history will reflect quite positively on the Duke, for this and many other reasons.  As to Sarah, I couldn't agree more with Kalafrana - millions of service wives have successfully handled absent husbands - and without cooks, chauffeurs, maids, personal assistants, nannies, etc.  or a virtually endless supply of funds to ease their burdens.  This spoiled, self-involved, classless and self-pitying woman couldn't hold a candle to any of them.

Offline grandduchessella

  • Global Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 13039
  • Getting Ready to Move to Europe :D
    • View Profile
    • Facebook page
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #463 on: June 08, 2011, 08:31:31 AM »
I've been a military wife for 19 years and, yes, you do find a way to deal. I currently see my husband 2 days a week while he is stationed at the Pentagon and I work full-time and have 3 children. He deployed 3 times while we were on a 4 year assignment to Langley AFB--luckily they weren't 1 year deployments. And I had it pretty good--other spouses, especially those in the Marines & Army (I'm Air Force) have seen their husbands do 5 total years in Iraq/Afghanistan for a year at a time--with a 2 week break in the middle of the deployment. That's 14 days/year for multiple years--many don't even get the minimum 6 mos in between they are supposed to get between tours. And they have the worry & stress of their husbands actually being in harm's way to boot! So, yes, that excuse always particularly grated particularly as Andrew was in the Navy when she married him. How clear he made the life to her is between them but it certainly was the responsibility of both to thoroughly discuss it.
They also serve who only stand and wait--John Milton
Come visit on Pinterest--http://pinterest.com/lawrbk/

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York Pt II
« Reply #464 on: June 08, 2011, 09:23:19 AM »
When Sarah married into the royal family, she had no insight whatsoever into how the “firm” worked. 

That is just so obvious.

She quickly learned all the perks and benefits of her position (the stories of her throwing her weight around in the early days of her marriage are legion) but not about the many restrictions of it.

Because she married a prince, I’m sure she really thought he could step away from his duties in the Navy to return home to her any time she wanted.  I really think she was and is that dumb.  How else can it be explained? 

She is trying to persuade Andrew to re-marry her, I’m sure of it.