Kitty's Book

I like page 401 from the book. About the Queen's queens. I'm sure no one ever called the Queen Mother a "fag-hag", which is what it's called. But it's endearing because you can sort of see why such a circle is not very threatening. Well, not quite as much at least. For one thing, they're still men, and men can be very good company. Secondly, a few of them blur the lines so it's almost like men and women, or fairies or whatever, all in one, without the woman-jealousy. And thirdly, they're not trying to seduce you and no one gets the wrong idea. I guess, finally, some, not all, bc I don't want to generalize, but some are fairly artsy and creative so this makes sense too. Sort of weird bc she's described as very traditional and didn't get along as well with Fergie or Di, but she was the one entertaining, or being entertained, by the queens. One of my favorite lines from this book comes from "pissed-off Margaret" who says, when someone asks whether the Queen is coming, "Which queen are you referring to? my mother, my sister, or my husband?" And I see it perfectly, as she's holding a cigarette lighter and has this very bored and sardonic look on her face. What's so weird is I never read about her and awhile back I was joking, I guess in an intuitive vein and it's just very strange because the more I read, the more I see that while I've sunk my ship, I was hitting on all of these very true things, having read and seen very little about the family. My intuition was clacking all over the place. No wonder people have wondered what I'm up to. I shock myself!

I read this part about a candle flickering at William's christening and held the book up, stunned, and then rested it, crooked, across my forehead. hOlymacarole. I start thinking, "Does everyone have weird experiences with candle flames?" I think, for one 2 seconds, "OH NO, people will think I wrote about my candle flame flicker experience, thinking I've read about THIS first!!!! nooooo..." and then I snapped out of it and my other self said in a reprimanding voice, "No they won't. Van derPost said it was indicative of a crisis but that he'll survive...It's about Princess Diana dummy--candle in the WIND, get it?" relief.

Then I was thinking, recently, i sid something about heads of state being involved in ridiculous things and realized, oh yeah, Queen is a head of state. I was thinking about the UN or ambassadors, but this came out.

Well, well, I have not even read the "Hello" interview about Prince William yet. I am behind the ball on everything.

As for kitty's book, I think she's a great writer. I do think, though, that she exaggerates. She writes Charles told Di about Mannakee and then pushed her out of the car. "Pushed" out of the car puts a lot of different ideas in the mind. Did he really "push" her? you know, sometimes, it makes for entertaining reading but it's not completely fair. What makes her book different is how she actually uses quotes so it is "showing" not telling so much.

I was reading about Fergie and it sparked my memory. Because i didn't have a t.v. so long and wasn't caught up with all the media drama about this family or even Di, I was always out of the loop. But I have remembered seeing a book of Di here or there, laid out, and then I remembered about Fergie!

I remembered, one conversation in the kitchen, over a decade ago, about Fergie. The family I worked for, the Ks, a Jewish reform family, the guy really loved her. He thought she was great fun and talked about her a lot. That's all I remember, is some conversation about her. I think he liked her more than Di. I have no idea how the whole thing even came up but it was in 1993! And I remember he was enamored of Fergie.
***********
This is so strange. All of these books and articles contradict eachother. I don't know which one is saying it right. On page 485 of the book a woman is quoted as asking where Di's kids are and Di says "in school." but another book I read, quoted her as saying they were in bed.

So many not being careful or checking their sources, or doing this intentionally.
****************
i guess it was a mean book afterall. finished it today. really horrible part about the Queen on the last page.

I also got confused by small details...philip is quoted as calling the Queen "sausage" but in the movie The Queen, he calls her "cabbage". So which is it? why does it matter? because sometimes little details add up and not paying attention to small details means the wrong picture is constructed. you can't put a jig-saw together with details awry because you'll get it wrong, won't find the fit, and there will never be a completed portrait...just pieces all scrambled up. i think this is one reason i've been thought of as a threat. i pay attention to things and have made unusual discoveries because of it. mabye that's just one small reason, i don't know. i'm not even trying to find things right now, just enjoying reading, but then this stuff pops back to me and i wonder where the straight record is...the bible on the family with the footnotes and real sources to back it up.

so, maybe he calls her sausage AND cabbage and they're just interchangeable nicknames. no big deal. but when i see inconsistencies, i notice and i cannot help BUT notice. if i spot errors in dumb details that don't matter, it means someone hasn't checked their work carefully enough and maybe there are very serious errors that will be largely unchecked and unnoticed as well.

i'm not doing anything about the case at all. i'm just reading and learning, but out of the gamuts of information, i wonder how it's ever sorted.

the strangest thought just came to mind. a logo from a movie, and which was a popular slogan for awhile. i don't dare say what it is. but it came to mind.

anyway, you have to be careful who you trust. even fag hags have to be careful because not every queen (gay man sort) is bi-political. and not everything is as it appears.

i'm still trying to figure out who wanted me in federal prison and who has wanted me without my voice and poisoned too. things aren't a lot better right now, because then i found out my lawyers and others wanted me without my son as well. there are very bad groups that want to do as much harm and degradation to me as possible and it really starts to make one wonder WHY. and if there are people out there like that, do you really want to be around them, unknowing, and lured into their influence? my opinion is that there are some serious users out there whose interests or group interests are being served best if they can somehow keep me down, dirty me up the best they can, and punish me and my son while they further their own agendas. no one in their right mind puts this much effort into hating someone, or, alternately, feeling very guilty about doing wrong, unless it is for some "greater good" that has been raised up to be the standard.

i have not been lying about all of the problems: theft, physical torture of me and my son, and harassment. i am not paranoid, not nuts, and i am not lying.

if anyone has tried to say i am the problem with this custody matter and that someone was trying to help with my case, it's not true. i don't want ANYONE who actually DOES care, to be so deceived as to think that i have made an error in judgement or that i must be wrong. i'm not wrong. i have seen it with my own eyes and watched what has been happening. i have not had anyone really fight to protect both my PRIVACY and my SON. with one, i would leave the office and the whole town is going by, repeating things i had said, and the same with the other.

not one thing i say or do has been confidential.